Hugvísindasvið
The Wish to Marry and Its
Consequences
On Hierarchies in the Eddic Poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál, and
Þrymskviða
Ritgerð til MA-prófs í víkinga- og miðaldafræðum
Johanna Nowotnick
September 2015
Háskóli Íslands
Hugvísindasvið
Viking and Medieval Norse Studies
The Wish to Marry and Its
Consequences
On Hierarchies in the Eddic Poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál, and
Þrymskviða
Ritgerð til MA-prófs í víkinga- og miðaldafræðum
Johanna Nowotnick
Kt.: 041188-5029
Leiðbeinandi: Ármann Jakobsson
September 2015
Ágrip
Vensl á borð við hjónabönd eru algengt minni í norrænum bókmenntum. Í
eddukvæðunum Skírnismálum, Alvíssmálum og Þrymskviðu er einnig fengist við
giftingarhugleiðingar og afleiðingar þeirra. Þó að fjölbreyttar ástæður séu að baki við
óskum um hjónabönd eru margir þættir sem einkenna þau í þessum goðsögulegu
frásögnum. Þar sem goðsagnir hvers samfélags eru oft eins konar skuggsjá af félagslegum
viðmiðum og mynstrum í því, þá eru hinar norrænu frásagnir um æsi, vani og jötna
mikilvægar til að veita innsýn í raunveruleika íslensks miðaldasamfélags.
Út frá þeirri forsendu má bera goðsagnalegu frásagnirnar saman við varðveitt lög frá
þjóðveldistímanum til að varpa nýju ljósi á virkni goðsagnaheims og raunheims norrænna
manna. Í þessari rannsókn er sjónum einkum beint að stigveldunum sem tengjast
hjúskaparlögum (milli guða og annarra goðsagnavera, karla og kvenna, feðra og dætra)
og koma í ljós í rannsókninni og enn fremur hvernig þeim er haldið við og þau varin.
Abstract
Alliances such as marriage are a recurring topic within the Old Norse literary corpus. The
three Eddic poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál, and Þrymskviða also address the wish to marry,
as well as its consequences. Although the reasons for entering the bonds of marriage may
vary widely, common elements that characterise a conjugal union can be established in
these mythological accounts. And because any given society’s myths are often found to
mirror its social norms and patterns, the Old Norse narratives of æsir, vanir, and giants
are thought to provide some insight into the reality of the medieval Icelandic society.
Based on this assumption, a comparison of the mythological recordings with the
transmitted laws from the Icelandic Free State period (ca. 930-1262/64) can shed new
light on the mechanics of both the mythological and the factual worlds of Old Norse
society. This study will focus on the hierarchies associated with marriage regulations
(between the gods and other mythological beings, males and females, fathers and
daughters) that may emerge from this analysis, as well as the ways in which these are
maintained and protected.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3
2. Approach, Theory and Sources .................................................................................... 5
2.1 Approach ................................................................................................................. 5
3. Social Structures ......................................................................................................... 11
3.1 The Mythological Society: An Attempt at Classification ..................................... 11
3.2 Kinship and Descent in the Mythological World ................................................. 12
3.4 FeMale: Single-sex Model or Not......................................................................... 15
4. Matrimony in Medieval Iceland ................................................................................. 18
5. Skírnismál - Winning the Woman: Wooing, Threatening, and Cursing – Anything
Goes ............................................................................................................................ 21
5.1. Skírnismál – Tradition and Content ..................................................................... 21
5.2 Just Courtship or Smoothing the Way for Matrimony? ........................................ 22
5.3 Interim Conclusion ............................................................................................... 28
6. Alvíssmál – To Lead the Bride Home or Not ............................................................. 29
6.1 Alvíssmál – Tradition and Content........................................................................ 29
6.2 The Final Authority – The Bride’s Father ............................................................ 29
6.3 Interim Conclusion ............................................................................................... 34
7. Þrymskviða – One Bride Is Not Like Another ........................................................... 35
7.1 Þrymskviða – Tradition and Content .................................................................... 35
7.2 Justified Objections and Their Implications ......................................................... 35
7.3 Interim Conclusion ............................................................................................... 40
8. Conclusion and Further Perspectives ......................................................................... 42
Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 47
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 51
2
1. Introduction
Eg mun bregða
því að eg brúðar á
fleǫt um ráð sem faðir,
vark-a eg heima
þá er þér heitið var,
að sá einn er gjöfer með goðum.1
Þórr directs these strong and distinct words as in response to the dwarf Alvíss who
affianced with the god’s daughter in his absence and now wants to take his future wife
home. Although this stanza is only one segment of Eddic poetry revolving around
matrimony, it provides a clear insight into the set of rules mythological beings play by: a
marriage is not deemed valid without the consent of the bride’s father.
Marriage and similar sexual alliances between women and men are constantly
recurring motifs in literature. As the lines from Alvíssmál show, this matter is also
addressed in the medieval compilation of Eddic poems – both the mythological and the
heroic lays – as well as in Snorri Sturlusons’s Edda and the Old Norse sagas. Although
the descriptions may differ from source to source in regards to their emphasis (which can
for instance be the courtship or the wedding ceremony itself), they all create a strong
picture of the imagined mythological world and provide, at least to some extent,
information about medieval Icelandic society. Matrimony reflects a wide range of social
regulations and boundaries by which the Old Norse gods and other mythological beings
had to comply with but are also expressed through other events. It is, indeed, no sheer
coincidence that Þórr battles in many stories giants or other ‘evildoers’ to divert imminent
danger from the worlds of the gods and humans. Þórr’s actions are his contribution to
sustaining the existing social standards and given conditions within the mythological
world. Here it is the æsir who lead the social hierarchy and make the rules to retain this
advantageous state.
The culture of writing arrived in Iceland together with Christianity which has been
officially accepted in 999/1000. It is therefore safe to assume that Christian scribes
recorded the stories of the pre-Christian gods for a Christian audience, and that their
writing was influenced by their new faith. And yet, the Christian scribes dealt with the
1
Alv 4, Jónas Kristjánsson and Vésteinn Ólason, ed., Eddukvæði 1, Goðakvæði (Reykjavík: Hið Íslenzka
Fornritfélag, 2014), 438.
3
beliefs of a bygone time in the twelfth century, while the narratives that they were dealing
with may have had their origin in the eighth or ninth century.
In medieval Iceland personal bonds were of great importance since they characterised
the social order. This was also reflected in matrimony, which was only on rare occasions
entered into due to pure love. Whatever promoted marriage, it happened according to
certain rules and social standards and was often conducted on behalf of the interests of a
family as opposed to merely love or even romance.2
As a similar impression is created in the mythological poems, it seems pertinent to
take a closer look at these literary accounts and compare them with sources about the
medieval Icelandic society.
The aim of this thesis is to investigate the significance of the pre-Christian marriage myths
as they pertain to the subsequent Christian society in Iceland by focussing on the
relationship between female and male mythological figures as well as the accepted
behaviour patterns within that society. Within this frame, the following questions will be
approached:
What is a myth, and what function did the pre-Christian marriage myths have for the
Icelandic people in the thirteenth century? To what extent are the delineated social order
and the constituted behaviour of the gods applicable to thirteenth-century Icelandic
society? How and why were females bent to males’ will to marry them? And finally,
could females assert their wish to marry, and on what terms could that happen?
To answer these questions, the three mythological poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál and
Þrymskviða will be examined regarding their depicted marriage myth elements. To begin
with, the state of research on matrimony and the role of women in that alliance, as well
as the three poems, are provided. Then the approach and the concept of myth will be
outlined. The textual analyses of the three Eddic poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál, and
Þrymskviða are preceded by reflections on the Old Norse mythological world as well as
on matrimony in medieval Iceland. The considerations on marriage are based on the legal
codex Grágás and are revisited in the surveys of the poems. Finally the conclusion of this
examinations and further prospects are proposed.
2
Jenny Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society (Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press, 1995), 31; see also
Bjørn Bandlien, Strategies of Passion: Love and Marriage in Medieval Iceland and Norway, trans. Betsy
van der Hoek (Turnhout: Brepols, 2005), 4.
4
2. Approach, Theory and Sources
2.1 Approach
As this work discusses the Old Norse myths on marriage with an emphasis on the role of
women, it seems particularly apt to apply a feministic approach on the textual corpus. In
her monograph The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction (1978)
the literary scholar Judith Fetterly criticises that female readers are supposed to identify
with the male perspective and that they have to accept this as a conventional and justified
fact.3 According to Fetterley it is only possible to change that perception by renouncing
oneself from being an agreeing reader, and turn into a so-called resisting reader who is
detached from established male ideologies that are integrated in our mind-set and, as such,
present in the written text. The resisting reader should instead read a text ‘against itself’.4
Another useful approach has been coined by Pierre Marcherey, who introduced the
idea of gaps and silences of a text. The French critic argues that these textual omissions
express the underlying ideology on which the text is created, and simultaneously signify
what is forbidden from being said.5 Because Helga Kress holds a similar view in her
article Taming the Shrew: The Rise of Patriarchy and the Subordination of the Feminine
in Old Norse Literature (2002), it seems most fruitful to combine the idea of gaps and
silences with a comparative approach in order to accentuate the functionality of the Old
Norse marriage myth(s) for medieval Christian Icelandic society.
2.2 Theory – Concept of Myth and Its Tradition
To investigate the meaning and functionality of Old Norse marriage myths for the
subsequent Icelandic society in this work, a definition of the concept “myth” should first
be approached. The term “myth” derives from the Old Greek word μῦθος (mýthos) and is
a narrative in poetic or prosaic form that creates a reference between This World and The
Other World. The described events usually take place in The Other World and in a distant
time or even beyond time. The main actors in myths are gods and other supernatural
beings as well as humans, and their existence is unquestionable for the particular (human)
3
Judith Fetterley, The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction (Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 1978), xx.
4
Ibid., xxi-xxii.
5
Terry Eagleton, Marxism and Literary Criticism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976), 16.
5
society. Myths have an impact on the entity of the related society’s world view and how
it is structured, but are not entitled to make claims of truth.6 They have to legitimise the
establishment of social institutions as well as associated norms, such as the hierarchy
among the Old Norse gods and giants. Moreover, people use myths as a tool to explain
the environment they live in (i.e., natural phenomena), and to express their selfconception as a group. These narratives also have to deal with everyday life to preserve
their meaning.7
The Egyptologist Jan Assmann goes a step further with his definition considering
myth as a connection to the past and thus a form of remembering that is maintained
through generations. How this form of memory is organised, and how long knowledge is
kept depends, according to Assmann, on social and cultural parameters. In other words
myths are of a dynamic character but adapt to cultural needs and are thereby altered.8
Both Jan Assmann and Kirsten Hastrup point out that a transition of myth(s) takes place
when the former orally transmitted narratives pass into writing. Preliterate societies store
their memories in events, and beyond that use human memory as a medium or carrier; for
this reason a distinct limitation of recollection can be observed. When writing was finally
introduced, an improvement emerged as script enables one to transfer, store and recall
memory. It allows one to sustain memory beyond the limits of an epoch or generation, as
it is able to bear more than human memory could ever remember.9
At the same time texts in the Middle Ages were of a different nature than today. In
those times a text was not fixed or stable but rather changeable and could be adapted to
the prevailing circumstances. When society changed, texts that approached social norms
6
The historian of religion Jens Peter Schjødt distinguishes This World, by which he means our human
world, from The Other World, the world of the gods and other mythological and heroic beings. Jens Peter
Schjødt, Initiation Between Two Worlds: Structure and Symbolism in Pre-Christian Scandinavian Religion
(Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2008) 65; see also Catharina Raudvere, “The Power of
the Spoken Word as Literary Motif and Ritual Practice in Old Norse Literature,” Viking and Medieval
Scandinavia 1 (2005): 190.
7
Ármann Jakobsson, “Enter the Dragon: Legendary Saga Courage and the birth of the Hero,” in Making
History: Essays on the Fornaldarsögur, ed. Martin Arnold and Alison Finlay (London: Viking Society for
Northern Research, 2010), 36.
8
Jan Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedächtnis – Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen
Hochkulturen (München: C. H. Beck, 2007), 78.
9
Ibid., 23; see also Kirsten Hastrup, “Presenting the Past – Reflections on Myth and History,” Folk 29
(1987): 265.
6
or intellectual concerns had to follow suit to maintain their meaning and
comprehensibility.10
The same rules applied to myths. Without adapting to new social conditions, these
narratives had lost their meaning and probably faded into obscurity.11
The most important accounts dealing with Old Norse mythology are the two Eddas,
the Poetic Edda and Snorra Edda. Although these written sources provide a very
comprehensive insight into the collection of narratives, the greater part of these narratives
have probably been lost over the course of centuries.12 Both these virtual sanctuaries are
only the tip of the iceberg whose remaining mass will unfortunately stay inaccessible.
The Poetic Edda is a compilation of ten mythological and nineteen heroic poems
which are of anonymous Icelandic origin. The manuscript Codex Regius (Gks 2365, 4to)
serves as the basis for most editions and was compiled around 1270. Smaller collections
of poems might have predated this extensive compilation and were presumably put into
writing in the early thirteenth century.13 A second but only fragmentarily preserved
manuscript originating from the early fourteenth century (AM 748, 4to) contains six
mythological poems in total as well as the heroic lay Vǫlundarkviða.
The metres in which the Eddic poems are composed are fornyrðislag (“old lore
metre”), ljóðaháttr (“metre of the chant”) and galdralag (“metre of the charm”).
Fornyrðislag occurs in the narrative poems of the Poetic Edda as well as on the Rök rune
stone from the early ninth century.14 Ljóðaháttr is the metre that is often used within
wisdom poetry but also occurs in dialogical poems. Galdralag is employed in stanzas of
a magical or cursing nature.15
10
Preben Meulengracht Sørensen, Kapitler af Nordens Litteratur i Oldtid og Middelalder (Aarhus: Aarhus
Universitetsforlag, 2006), 18/19.
11
Hastrup, “Presenting the Past,” 260.
12
It is still unclear where the name Edda derives from. One suggestion is the derivation from the Old Norse
word edda ‘great-grandmother’. Another idea is that the word originates in the Latin word edo (infinitive
ēdere) ‘I say, I utter [poetry]’. A combination of both is also conceivable which is to be understood as
‘great-grandmother of poetry compendia’. Paul Acker, “Introduction – Edda 2000,” in The Poetic Edda –
Essays on Old Norse Mythology, ed. Paul Acker and Carolyne Larrington (New York and London:
Routledge, 2002),” xiii.
13
These smaller collections are lost. Terry Gunnell, The Origins of Drama in Scandinavia (Cambridge/
Rochester, New York: Brewer/ Boydel & Brewer, 1995), 184. In the 1640s the Codex Regius entered into
possession of the Icelandic bishop Brynjólfur Sveinsson. He sent the manuscript in 1662 as a present to the
Danish king Frederik III, and the manuscript remained in Copenhagen until 1971 when it finally returned
to Iceland. Meulengracht Sørensen, Kapitler af Nordens Litteratur, 62/63.
14
Rudolf Simek and Hermann Pálsson “Lexikon der Altnordischen Literatur,” (Stuttgart: Kröner, 1987)
99/100.
15
Ibid., 105; 250/251.
7
Although the metres can be traced back to the pre-Christian times, the dating of the
poems themselves is rather difficult. Some stanzas, admittedly even whole poems, are
quoted in other written accounts that are of an earlier origin than the Codex Regius. And
yet, it is strictly the manuscripts that can be dated while the poems’ age will remain
untold.16 Terry Gunnell summarises this difficulty: “In short, the manuscripts’ versions
reflect the state of the poems as they existed in the oral tradition in the mid-twelfth
century, at the very earliest.”17
The poems of the Poetic Edda served as sources for the mythological narratives told
by Snorri Sturlson as well as Saxo Grammaticus.18 Snorri Sturluson compiled his Edda
(Snorra Edda) presumably as a handbook for skalds. As it also provides a multitude of
prose narratives about the gods’ deeds, it is an essential tool to understand and work with
the Eddic poems. Snorra Edda is not a homogenous work, however, and therefore must
be treated with caution. Quite a few examples from it are stated within this thesis as they
are necessary to understand correlations and social fabrics. It is also pertinent to point out
that both the structure of the mythological world and the social hierarchy among
supernatural beings are mainly based on the information provided by Snorra Edda.
Referring to the medieval Icelandic norms and regulations, examples from the
compilation Grágás are employed. Grágás is not a coherent body of laws of Iceland’s
Free State period (930-1262/64) but rather a collective term for laws from different times
and manuscripts.19 The two main codices are Kónungsbók (Gks 1157 fol., ca. 1260) and
Staðarhólsbók (AM 334 fol., ca. 1280).
In this thesis the Old Norse quotes are taken from the following editions:
-
Eddukvæði 1, Goðakvæði. Edited by Jónas Kristjánsson and Vésteinn Ólason.
Reykjavík: Hið Íslenzka Fornritfélag, 2014.20
16
Meulengracht Sørensen, Kapitler af Nordens Litteratur, 66.
Terry Gunnell, The Origins of Drama, 184.
18
Saxo Grammaticus (ca. 1150-1220) was a Danish chronicler and historian. He recorded in 16 books the
history of Denmark. This work is called Gesta Danorum and the books 1-9 deal with the Old Norse
mythology. For further readings see Karsten Friis-Jensen, ed., Saxo Grammaticus – A Medieval Author
Between Norse and Latin Culture (København: Museum Tusculanum, 1981).
19
Not all preserved laws were valid at the same time, and a part of those laws was probably never valid.
Andrew Dennis, Peter Foote and Richard Perkins, trans., Laws of Early Iceland – Grágás: The Codex
Regius of Grágás with Material from other Manuscripts (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1980)
9/10.
20
This is the most recent edition of the Eddic poems in Old Norse. Jónas Kristjánsson and Vésteinn Ólason
provide a detailed commentary for each verse and apply the standardised spelling in Old Norse that occurs
17
8
-
Grágás – Lagasafn íslenska þjóðveldisins. Edited by Gunnar Karlsson, Kristján
Sveinsson and Mörður Árnarson. Reykjavík: Mál og menning, 1992.
-
Snorri Sturluson – Edda: Prologue and Gylfaginning. Edited by Anthony Faulkes.
London: Viking Society for Northern Research University College London, 2005.
-
Snorri Sturluson – Edda: Skáldskaparmál 1. Edited by Anthony Faulkes. London:
Viking Society for Northern Research University College London, 1998.
The research history on matrimony and women’s studies in medieval Iceland (and
Norway) is of a wide scope. A multitude of monographs and articles have been published
during the last decades and the topic is far from exhausted. Jenny Jochens made history
with her two monographs Old Norse Images of Women (1996) and Women in Old Norse
Society (1995), a great contribution to the field of women’s studies in the medieval north.
The first of the two works deals with the different mythological and human images of
women as they are preserved in poetic and prose written accounts - both Old Norse and
Latin sources - from the medieval period. Here Jochens emphasises underlying
conceptions of women as well as their role within the described society.
The latter, Women in Old Norse Society, however, discusses the lives of women in
Norway and Iceland with respect to their portrayal in the Islendingasǫgur, konungasǫgur,
and contemporary laws. Both monographs address the marriage topic and provide
extensive insight for this study.
Turning to the Eddic poem Skírnismál, Magnus Olsen published the article Fra
gammelnorsk myte og kultus (1909) in which he argued that the described events represent
a hieros gamos in form of a myth of vegetation. According to Olsen, the fertility god
Freyr wants to marry Gerðr, who embodies the earth goddess, but is unable to wake her
up, and thus sends Skírnir, the personification of the sunbeam, in his place. When Gerðr
finally wakes up, she and Freyr enter into matrimony, a divine connection that Olsen
considers as a sacred marriage, a so-called hieros gamos.21
also in other editions of Hið Íslenzka Fornritfélag. Beyond that, the edition discusses the poems’ age and
the topic they relate to. Other standard editions are Gustav Neckel’s Edda: Die Lieder des Codex Regius
nebst verwandten Denkmälern (1962) and Ursula Dronke’s The Poetic Edda I-III (1969/2011). Dronke’s
editions, however, are incomplete, and thus less practical for this thesis as Alvíssmál and Þrymskviða are
not contained.
21
As studies on Alvíssmál and Þrymskviða focus on other topics like the emerging/used language, raised
questions or the cross dressing as such, at this place a closer examination is not stated. For further readings
on Alvíssmál see Hans Klingenberg, “Alvíssmál: Das Lied vom überweisen Zwerg,” Germanisch-
9
In “What does woman want?” Mær and munr in Skírnismál (1992) Carolyne
Larrington discusses the curse that is directed against Gerðr with a feministic approach.
Larrington argues that Skírnir’s threats were the product of male imagination, and that,
by implication, five of the female’s wishes and desires could be identified. Helga Kress
also addresses Gerðr in her article Taming the Shrew: The Rise of Patriarchy and the
Subordination of the Feminine in Old Norse Literature (2002). Kress emphasises the
violence that is applied to women to bend them according to male’s will as well as the
missing female voice in Old Norse literature.22
romanische Monatsschrift 48 (1967): 113-42, and Lennart Moberg. “The Languages of Alvíssmál,” SagaBook of the Viking Society 18 (1970-73): 299-323; on Þrymskviða see James Frankki, “Cross-Dressing in
the Poetic Edda - Mic muno Æsir argan kalla,” Scandinavian Studies 84, 4 (2012): 425-437, and Margaret
Clunies Ross “Reading Þrymskviða,” in The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology, ed. Paul Acker
and Carolyne Larrington (New York and London: Routledge, 2002), 177-194.
22
For further readings on Skírnismál see also Heinz Klingenberg, “Fǫr Skírnis: Brautwerbungsfahrt eines
Werbungshelfers,” Alvíssmál 6 (1996): 21-62.
10
3. Social Structures
3.1 The Mythological Society: An Attempt at Classification
According to written sources, a multitude of supernatural beings inhabit the Old Norse
mythological world. Among these are gods and giants but also elves, humans and many
other creatures. As in any other world a social structure or hierarchy can be observed. In
line with Margaret Clunies Ross’ monograph Prolonged Echoes - Old Norse Myths in
Medieval Northern Society (1994), these indigenous inhabitants can be distinguished in
various ways: as like and unlike groups, depending on to their spatial location and
according to kinship and descent. From whichever perspective the reader clusters the
supernatural beings, a favour for the gods and a negative attitude towards the giants can
usually be observed. This most likely being a result of the fact that the mythological
poems and narratives are written from the viewpoint of the gods whose interests are
strongly linked to the intentions of the humans. The reader is therefore already biased and
rather sympathetic towards the deeds of the æsir and vanir even though trickery, violence
and theft may occur, or oaths breached.23
The first ranking of like and unlike creatures is determined by a divergence between
the gods (both æsir and vanir) and the giants based on the supremacy of the giants through
the æsir which creates a distinct hierarchy.24 The second classification is built on the
geographical organisation of the mythological world which according to Snorra Edda
consists of Miðgarðr and Utgarðr. Miðgarðr is located in the centre of the world and
inhabited by the gods, humans and elves. In Utgarðr, on the other hand, giants and dwarfs
dwell.25 This order is not surprising as the events are described from the point of view of
gods, humans and elves which in this hierarchy are placed in the middle, the centre of the
Margaret Clunies Ross, Prolonged Echoes: Old Norse Myths in Medieval Northern Society – Volume 1:
The Myths (Odense: Odense University Press, 1994), 49.
24
By like and unlike creatures a distinction against the standard and ‘the other’ is meant. The standard or
normative group features similarities with the people who created and shared the mythological stories while
‘the other’ implies (a) group(s) that is/are diverged from the normative group in terms of habits, abodes etc.
25
The term Utgarðr emerges only in Gylf 39. The Eddic poems, however, mention only Miðgarðr. Ármann
Jakobsson examines the dwelling places of giants in his article “Where Do the Giants Live?” and concludes
that they literally live everywhere. As opposed to the gods who seem to live united in one place (Miðgarðr),
the giants which are often associated with the evil or chaos are scattered to the four winds and thus, to be
found at the shore, in the woods, or in the mountains. Ármann Jakobsson “Where Do the Giants Live?,”
Arkiv För Nordisk Filologi 121 (2006): 101-112.
23
11
world. The third arrangement Clunies Ross proposes is based on kinship and descent, and
seems most useful within the scope of this work and is therefore more closely developed.
3.2 Kinship and Descent in the Mythological World
On account of Gylfaginning 5-6, the frost giants were the first inhabitants of the
mythological world and thus the oldest supernatural beings. From them the æsir are the
matrilineal descendants, as the brothers’ (Óðinn, Vili and Vé) mother was the giantess
Bestla. The origin of the gods’ father Borr26, however, is not precisely specified. This
derivation and the consequently close kinship between æsir and giants is ascribed little
importance. In fact, from the unbalanced significance of the matrilineage emanates the
prevalent supremacy of the æsir over the giants in the sense of a social hierarchy. This
social structure in turn legitimises the prohibition of marriages between ásynjur and
giants,27 and has its origin in the unequal valuation of male and female in the Old Norse
mythological world which is further discussed in chapter 4.4.
These two social groups are not the only existing and ranked ones. With the vanir,
another group of supernatural beings stands somehow between them. Even though the
vanir have been incorporated into the group of æsir, they are not treated as equals, but are
located on a lower level. When the vanir were integrated into the group of gods, they had
to adapt to certain rules, among them the abandonment of incestuous relationships which
used to be common among the vanir. Due to their lower social rank, the vanir are also
forbidden to marry ásynjur. In order to fulfil the requirement of exogamous matrimony,
they are, however, given the right to marry giantesses.
In Marriage Exchange and Social Structure in Old Norse Mythology (1991), Torben
Anders Vestergaard refers to possible elementary kinship structures as generalised
exchange, restricted exchange and a combination of both principles of exchange.
Generalised exchange signifies the transfer of something from one group to another while
the giver receives something from a third party. Restricted exchange, on the other hand,
implies that one transfers something to another group and obtains something from the
same group. As related to social groups this implies that in a society characterised by
generalised exchange women of one group marry men of another group while men of the
26
27
According to Gylf 6, Borr emerged when the cow Auðhumla licked the rime from the stones.
Clunies Ross, Prolonged Echoes – The Myths, 57.
12
first group receive wives from a third group. For a generalised exchange, at least three
parties are necessary. In a society that is featured by restricted exchange, women are
permanently ‘traded’ between two groups.28 If these social groups were arranged to form
a hierarchy, the social system would evoke hypogamy which signifies an upwards
marriage of women. Hypergamy, on the other hand, implies a socially downward
marriage of women. If the social system is solely restricted to hypogamy, and women are
not allowed to marry into a social group that is ranked lower than their own, the circular
flow is interrupted.29
The three social groups of æsir, vanir and giants are, as already mentioned,
hierarchically structured, a condition that blocks the generalised exchange of women
among the supernatural beings. Matrimony is allowed among giantesses and vanir, as
well as among æsir and female vanir, but as there exists no higher ranked group than the
æsir, the ásynjur are only able to marry within their social group. In order to maintain the
dominance of the æsir over the vanir and the giants, they are only allowed to align
themselves endogamously.30
The marriage between the giantess Skaði and the vanr Njǫrðr illustrates that an
exchange of women between the individual social groups is possible. Since the æsir killed
the giant Þjazi, his daughter Skaði demands to marry one of the gods, more precisely
Baldr, as a compensation for her loss. The gods agree to her claim, but at the same time
attach the condition that the giantess has to identify her future husband by his feet. Skaði
‘fails’ and chooses Njǫrðr instead of Baldr.31 It seems safe to assume that the gods
outwitted Skaði to prevent her from marrying an áss as this would have disturbed the
dominant flow of women between the individual groups of supernatural beings.32
Another example for a hypogamous exchange is represented by the matrimony
between the female vanr Freyja and the constantly travelling áss Óðr. Freyja’s only
option is to marry into the group of æsir as she belongs to a social group that consists of
her and her family members, her brother Freyr and their father Njǫrðr.33
Torben Anders Vestergaard, “Marriage Exchange and Social Structure in Old Norse Mythology,” in Ross
Samson ed., Social Approaches to Viking Studies (Glasgow: Cruithne Press, 1991), 24.
29
Ibid., 26.
30
Ibid., 30.
31
Skskm 1.
32
Verstergaard, “Marriage Exchange,” 31.
33
Gylf 35.
28
13
Even though it was against the rules of hypogamy, the giants attempt to steal the
women of the gods. Freyja is often the giants’ object of desire, as related in several
mythological stories. The giant master builder in Gylfaginning 42, for instance, claims
Freyja, the sun and the moon as reward for the construction of Ásgarðr in the predefined
time period. Another example is described in the Eddic poem Þrymskviða in which the
giant Þrymr steals Þórr’s hammer and conversely demands Freyja as his bride.34 The
giants, however, also lust after ásynjur, as it is described in Skáldskaparmál 1. In this
chapter, it is the giant Þjazi who tries to ‘steal’ the goddess Iðunn.
The giants, as the group that ranks lowest in the social hierarchy, naturally desire
women of the superior social groups, and do their utmost to outwit the gods in order to
succeed in acquiring them. If the giants were fortunate with their attempts to win ásynjur
or Freyja as their wives, they would contribute to the restoration of the all-embracing
reciprocity and the associated denouement of the prevailing social hierarchy. Were the
giants to succeed, the gods would lose their supremacy and would end up on an equal
footing with the giants, a state of affairs that from the gods’ point of view has to be
avoided by whatever means necessary. As the examples have shown the giants do come
close to succeeding on many occasions, but unfortunately for them, never quite achieve
their goal.
The above described social structures and rules do not include all (supernatural)
beings. Dwarfs and humans, for instance, have been left out so far. But how do they rank
socially? From a purely literary angle, these types of beings are considered subgroups, as
they occupy minor roles in the narratives about Old Norse mythology. Other than that,
dwarfs and humans also differ from the older creatures in their origin: As it is told in
Gylfaginning 14 as well as in Vǫluspá 9, the æsir were their creators. Another
circumstance that seems relevant to classify humans and dwarfs into another group is that
they are not sexually involved with the gods. With regard to dwarfs, this is based on the
fact that their group is comprised of only males making them incapable of reproducing.35
In regards to humans no further reasoning is given.36
34
A closer examination of the depicted marriage myth can be found in chapter 5.3.
Anatoly Liberman, “What Happened to Female Dwarfs?,” in Mythological Women – Studies in Memory
of Lotte Motz (1922-1997), ed. Rudolf Simek and Wilhelm Heizmann (Fassbaender: Wien, 2002), 260/261.
A more detailed insight into the ‘dwarf topic’ provides chapter 6.2.
36
Clunies Ross, Prolonged Echoes – The Myths, 59; Clunies Ross suggests here that gods and humans “are
too much ‘other’ to allow the possibility of the development of kinship relationships between them.”.
35
14
3.4 FeMale: Single-sex Model or Not
As outlined above, females were ‘traded’ among the social groups of the æsir, vanir, and
giants, and thus treated like objects or commodities. Both Clunies Ross and Vestergaard
approach this circumstance in a structuralist and pragmatic way. Explanations for existing
social roles and possibly underlying ideological deficiencies in terms of equality between
females and males, however, seem to find little scholarly attention and even go virtually
unnoticed. In fact, the impression is conveyed that the trade of women between fathers
and future husbands was commonly accepted and justified in Old Norse mythology. In
order to prove that this was likewise generally valid for the medieval Icelandic population,
it seems essential to consider for a moment the saga genre as well as the underlying
legislation of medieval Iceland.
Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir highlights that female characters are usually reduced to
their outward appearance, primarily their bodies so to say, and according to their
biological sex.37 This recurring pattern is not only generic for patriarchal societies and
elucidates the hierarchies between women and men but it also provides a socket for social
structures: “[A] woman’s position, whatever her class, race, ethnicity, sexuality, or
religion, is usually first and foremost determined by her relationship to her male kin.”38
In this regard Jóhanna Katrín offers the example of differentiation of labour between
women and men as it is well known from the Old Norse saga literature: women wear keys
on their belt which signify females’ authority over the household (innan stokks) while
men are in charge of the world beyond that including agriculture, legislation, and travel,
to name but a few. This standard classification, as Carol Clover addresses the binary
division based on people’s sex, is usually applied to the social order and constitutes the
basis for an assumedly prevalent two-sex model in the Old Norse mythological, as well
as the (actual) medieval Icelandic world. Clover, however, proposes to detach from this
leading opinion of a two-sex model and suggests instead a single-sex model underlying
these societies: Since this sex was the male sex, it was more beneficial for men than for
women. In Clover’s view, the two sexes distinguish themselves through their polarity.
Even though femininity seemed likely to be associated to impuissance and masculinity
37
This is certainly likewise applied to men. Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Women in Old Norse Literature
– Bodies, Words and Power (New York: Palgrave and Macmillan, 2013), 8.
38
Ibid., 9.
15
was connected with sovereignty, these qualities were far from rigid. Rather, Clover
argues, they were applicable to both females and males. If something like gender existed,
Clover elaborates, it was “‘one gender’, one standard by which persons were judged
adequate or inadequate, and it was something like masculine.”39 According to this
understanding, females were not generally excluded from achieving a similar (if not the
same) status or reputation than that which men could obtain.40 However, even though
Clover assumes that a superiority of the male over the female was not given,41 the
example she chose to illustrate women’s rights or potential influence according to their
marital status points towards the opposite:
A woman’s control over whatever property she might technically was less a
function of her sex than her marital status: an unmarried and underage girl had none;
a married woman, little; a widow, however, “could have charge of her own
property, no matter her age, and administer of her children; she also had more say
in arrangements that might be made for another marriage.”42
As the underlying law does not equally differentiate between men, it exhibits a
distinctively close tie between the biological sex, and the marital status, but only for
women. Thus, a preference for the male sex is obvious and cannot be linked to the
acquirement of personal attributes as Clover argues. A superior ranking of the male is
also expressed in the earlier delineated exchange of women among the æsir, vanir and
giants. Once again it is not the men who are exchanged nor is there even an alternating
exchange. Instead, it is almost exclusively women who are ‘traded’ among the groups.
The only exception that stresses a similar treatment of a male mythological being like that
of a commodity is Njǫrðr, who is disposed of in marriage with the giantess Skaði instead
of Baldr.
The following and last paragraph that is preliminary to the textual analyses of this
thesis deals with the two most powerful attributes associated with women in Old Norse
written accounts (especially within the saga corpus): voice or words and magic. Both of
Carol Clover, “Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe,” Representations
44 (Autumns 1993): 13.
40
Ibid., 4.
41
Ibid., 13. Clover refers to Thomas W. Laqueur’s one-sex-model based on the assumption that differences
between women and men resulted from their social rather than their biological disparities. Thomas Laqueur,
Making Sex – Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990).
Clover’s article addresses examples from the Old Norse saga literature and the Old Norse law texts but also
makes references to the mythological narratives.
42
Ibid., 4. Clover quotes here Foote, Peter and David M. Wilson. The Viking Achievement – The Society
and Culture of Early Medieval Scandinavia (London: Sidgwick & Jackson 1970), 110.
39
16
these features could be deployed in various ways. While words for instance were used in
the form of advice or incitement, magic was utilised against illnesses but also to
prophesise or maintain peace.43 A woman’s voice or her words were her strongest and
often only capability to enforce her demands or wishes. Of course, they were not only
deployed for righteous reasons. That the male mythological characters were aware of
these abilities, their influence, and power will be demonstrated in the following analyses
of the three Eddic poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál and Þrymskviða.
44
In reference to
matrimony the prevalent discrepancy between females and males will be highlighted,
especially as men tried to ‘disarm’ female characters or use women’s ‘weapons’ against
them to bend them to the male’s will. By doing so they tried to maintain their supremacy
over the other sex – be it based on an inequality resulting from a single- or two-sex model.
The next chapters approach matrimony in medieval Iceland mainly based on legal
written accounts as well as three Eddic poems. The poems, as will be demonstrated,
reflect similar if not identical behaviour patterns and rules in the mythological world and
therefore, are considered as the mythological counterpart. For introductory matrimony
and related arrangements are described, followed by the textual analyses of Skírnismál,
Alvíssmál, and finally Þrymskviða.
43
Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir discusses both features in her monograph Women in Old Norse Literature
in reference to women’s agency as it is depicted in literary accounts. As Jóhanna Katrín’s contribution is
mainly referring to the Icelandic saga literature (including Íslendingasögur, samtíðarsögur, fornaldasögur,
riddarasögur) it is rather used to emphasise parallels and similarities within other literary genres that cannot
be considered within the scope of this thesis.
44
This applies also to saga characters as well as the medieval Icelandic society.
17
4. Matrimony in Medieval Iceland
“The German expression Kaufehe, captures the essential feature of a woman’s role and
status in a pagan marriage, for it suggests the fundamental connection between marriage
and property.”45
Before Iceland was subjugated by the Norwegian king in 1262/64, the country was
characterised by a society that consisted of freeborn (bœndr) and slaves (þrællar).46 The
social position of families was thus determined by its status and personal bonds towards
other families. Medieval Iceland’s social as well as political fabric were a sensitive
construct, and feuds among farmers could lead to the loss of property and discredit a
family’s status. By sustaining a family’s position within society, matrimony was an
essential issue. Alliances created through marriage were rather meant to maintain a
controlled transfer of property and to constitute or generate (new) allegiances. Such a
connection with other powerful families could strengthen a family’s political influence
and support peace between individual households.47 Matrimony was a requirement to
generate legitimate progeny who in turn were only considered as legal heirs. In addition
to that, marriage regularised sexual relationships between women and men.48
In the Erfðaþáttur (“inheritance section”) of Grágás it is said that “sonur á að taka
arf að föður sinn og móður, frjálsborinn og arfgengur.”49 Later a definition is added as
to what constitutes a person to be a legal heir: “Eigi eru allir men arfgengir þótt
frjálsbornir sér. Sá maður er eigi arfgegnir er móðir hans er eigi mundi keypt, mörk eða
meira fé, eða eigi brullaup til gert eða eigi föstnuð.”50 According to this, a child was only
allowed to take over its parents’ property if its parents fulfilled the requirements for a
legally recognised marriage. Both marriage law and inheritance law were obviously
closely interwoven, and thus, interdependent.
45
Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 20.
These two groups were subdivided into freeborn but dependent men (leiglendingar) and freedmen
(leysingjar). For more details on the social classes in medieval Iceland during the Free State period see
Hastrup, Culture and History, in Medieval Iceland – An Anthropological Analysis of Structure and Change
(Oxford: Clarendon Press: 1985), 105-135, and Jesse Byock, Viking Age Iceland (London: Penguin Books,
2001).
47
Bandlien, Strategies of Passion, 4; see also Kirsten Hastrup, Culture and History, 90.
48
Ibid., 90/91; see also Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 20.
49
Gg, Erfðaþáttur, Gunnar Karlsson, Kristján Sveinsson and Mörður Árnarson, ed., Grágás – Lagasafn
íslenska þjóðveldisins (Reykjavík: Mál og menning, 1992), 47.
50
Ibid., 49.
46
18
To enter into matrimony, however, required that the future spouses were a jafnræði
(“equal match”) with regard to their social rank and prosperity.51 Aside from this initial
situation, a legal marriage furthermore consisted of the three main elements mundr
(“bride’s wealth” which is already mentioned in the above stated quote), festar
(“betrothals”) and brúðlaup (“wedding feast”). The groom’s family was obligated to pay
the mundr to the bride’s marriage guardian which officially became the bride’s possession
after the wedding was consummated.52 Woman and man were considered to be affianced
once they had made their betrothals along with which the bride’s wealth was paid and the
wedding day was scheduled. These promises were officially binding, and the breaking
off of an engagement was considered to be a serious issue and implied not only the “loss”
of the bride’s wealth but also the dowry that was paid by the marriage guardian.53
Ef sá ifast ráða er sér hefir konu festa, og varðar eigi við lög, en mund skal heimta
svo sem mæltur var, og með þeim máldraga sem mælt var að festamálum, ef hann
skyldi af hendi leysa. En hann á kost að stefna að heimili þess er sóttur er, eða þar
er stefnustaður er réttur, um allan mund saman, enda er kostur að stefna þar er
brúðkaup er mælt, og um allan mundinn saman, hinn næsta dag rúmhelgan því er
ráð skyldu takast ok skal sækja við festavottorð, en dómur skal dæma gjalddaga svo
sem vættið bar máldaga til.54
A similar rule certainly applies if the marriage guardian of the bride issues any caveat
and finally decides to terminate a betrothal.
En ef sá ifast ráða er konuna hefir fastnað, þá skal hinn fara þangað […] Og rétt er
honum [supposed groom] að stefna um heimanfylgju þá, er þá skyldi fram koma,
og svo um það fé er hinn skyldi til brúðkaups leggja. Enda er réttað heimta
heimanfulgju með slíkum máldaga öllum sem áður var tint of mundinn, ef hann
þurfti að heimta.55
Women were, regardless of their age, always represented by a marriage guardian56
who was usually either their brother or father. If neither father nor brother(s) were alive
even their mother could assume this responsibility.57 “[…] En þá er faðir fastnandi dóttur
sinnar. En þá skal bróðir samfeðri fastna systur sína. En ef eigi er bróðir, þá skal fastna
móðir dóttur sína. Þar aðeins fastnar kona konu.”58 In this connection it seems
51
Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 24.
Hastrup, Culture and History, 94.
53
Ibid., 93.
54
Gg, Festaþáttur, 113.
55
Ibid.
56
Men who were under sixteen were also represented by a so-called marriage guardian.
57
Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 25; see also Hastrup, Culture and Histroy, 93.
58
Gg, Festaþáttur 1, 109.
52
19
noteworthy to mention that the future bride, although she (probably) had the greatest
interest in the agreement, was kept away from the negotiations, and usually had no vote
concerning the choice of her future husband. Consequently, a wooer could only be
rejected by the marriage guardian but not by the woman herself.59 A woman’s needs or
desires were of especially little concern. Whatever promoted marriage, it happened
according to the above mentioned rules and social standards, and was often conducted on
behalf of the interests of a family as opposed to merely love or even romance.
With these thoughts on matrimony in mind, this work proceeds to the analyses of the
three Eddic poems to demonstrate similarities and/or prove a deep entrenchment of these
norms even in the mythological narratives, with their roots in a (pre-)Christian era.
59
Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 25.
20
5. Skírnismál - Winning the Woman: Wooing, Threatening, and Cursing
– Anything Goes
5.1. Skírnismál – Tradition and Content
The Eddic poem Skírnismál, denoted as Fǫr Skírnirs (“Skírnir’s journey”) and consisting
of 42 stanzas is completely preserved in the Codex Regius manuscript. Beyond that, the
prose prologue and stanzas 1-27 are contained in the fragmentary manuscript AM 748 I
4to, and moreover, stanza 42 is quoted in Gylfaginning 37, but displays here a different
wording.60 In addition to a prose prologue, two (further) prose insertions are part of the
poem and follow after stanzas 10 and 39. The prevailing metre in Skírnismál is ljóðaháttr,
but galdralag and fornyrðislag can also be found.61
Skírnismál tells of the giantess Gerðr who lives at her father’s abode and is watched
by Freyr while sitting on Hliðskiálfr, Óðinn‘s high seat. As the vanr becomes lovesick
his servant Skírnir sets off to win Gerðr for Freyr. Together with her maiden, Gerðr is at
her well-protected hall when the stranger Skírnir arrives. Once she invites the visitor into
her hall, he urges her to agree to his wooing, which he conducts on behalf of Freyr. The
giantess expresses her rejection, which in turn evokes threats on the part of Skírnir. These
uttered curses finally lead to Gerðr’s subjection and her inevitable succumbing to
Skírnir’s demand of meeting Freyr.
In addition to this account, Gerðr is also mentioned in several other sources. These
are Gylfaginning 37, Ynglinga saga 10, the Eddic poem Hyndluljóð 30 and
Skáldkaparmál 1. There is, indeed, more than one written source that addresses the tie
between Gerðr and Freyr, but yet, the focus is on the poem Skírnismál since it is unique
with regard to the other sources mentioned above: the poem reports solely on the
proceedings of Skírnir to accomplish the purpose of his journey: the winning of the
female. The account enables us to obtain more information about the relationship between
women and men as well as accepted or at least tolerated behaviour patterns governing the
courtship that precedes both betrothal and matrimony.
Gylf 37, here Freyr says: “Lǫng er nótt,/ lǫng er ǫnnur,/ hvé mega ek þreya þrjár?/ Opt mér mánaðr/
minni þótti/ en sjá hálf hýnótt.”; in Skm 42 he says: “Lǫng er nótt-/ langar ro tvær-/ hvé um þreyiak þriár?/
Opt mér mánaðr/ minni þótti/ en siá hálf hýnótt.”.
61
Klaus von See et al., Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 2: Götterlieder - Skírnismál,
Hárbarðslióð, Hymiskviða, Lokasenna, Þrymskviða (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, 1997), 58.
60
21
5.2 Just Courtship or Smoothing the Way for Matrimony?
Until stanza 14 Gerðr has no agency within the poem but is solely described by the prose
introduction and the male protagonists Freyr, Skírnir and the shepherd (hirðir). The
prologue informs the reader that Freyr caught sight of a female while sitting illicitly at
Hliðskiálfr. The girl’s identity is merely revealed by her current whereabouts, her name,
however, is not referred to. Nevertheless, she appears to Freyr as the most appealing
female: “Í Gymis gǫrðum/ ek sá ganga/ mér tíða mey:/ armar lýsto/ en af þaðan/ alt lopt
ok lǫgr.”62 With these words Freyr creates a very concise and strong picture of his
inamorata that underlines his despair. He also emphasises the girl’s physical appearance.
The female, hence, must have had a stirring effect, and beyond that, she must have been
in compliance with the social ideal of beauty63, as the motif of brightly shining arms or
the comparison of the beloved with the sun were frequently used to delineate women’s
attractiveness.64
And yet, Freyr becomes virtually lovesick in stanza 7: “Mær er mér tíðari/ en manni
hveim/ ungum í árdaga;/ ása ok álfa/ þat vill engi maðr/ at vit samt sém.” A reason for
the mentioned denial of a possible relationship between the vanr and the giantess,
certainly, is not explained. An explanation could be the social inequality that seems to be
apparent to Freyr as Gerðr and him do not belong to the same social class and thus, are
not jafnræði. Accordingg to Jenny Jochens’ studies on marriage in Old Norse society,
“the most stringent requirement was to stay within the social class into which one was
born.”65 Applied to the mythological society, this meant that a marriage between Gerðr
and Freyr was probably ill-fated albeit a conjugal union between giantesses and male
vanir was not explicitly prohibited.66
According to the first prose insertion (after stanza 10), Gerðr, who is now mentioned
for the first time by name, seems to be well guarded: “Þar vóro hundar ólmir, ok bundnir
fyrir skíðgarðs hliði, þess er um sal Gerðar var”. Gerðr seems so precious to her father
Gymir that she is in need of protection. Due to that, he ‘fences’ her and deploys
62
Skm 6.
The ideal of beauty that presumably was prevalent at the time of composing.
64
Ursula Dronke, The Poetic Edda: Volume II – Mythological Poems (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997),
406.
65
Jochens, Women in Old Norse Society, 21.
66
See chapter 3.2 on the hierarchy of the Old Norse mythological world. Here the marriage between the
giantess Skaði and the vanr Njǫrðr is mentioned which later fails according to Skskm 1.
63
22
frightening dogs to keep strangers away from her. As her father and guardian, Gymir is
able to decide who she is going to be married to: a man that is to him the most dignified.67
The protection measures around Gerðr’s hall, thus, should be considered as preventive,
keeping her from falling in love with anyone, and/or choosing her husband autonomously.
In accordance with this latter suggestion is the shepherd’s utterance “Þú skalt æ vera/
góðrar meyiar Gymis”68 – Skírnir does not merit to be with Gymir’s daughter.69 Gymir’s
power as a guardian is expressed, even though implicitly. He alone will give his daughter
in marriage, and to consolidate this power, he has made provisions against unwanted
wooers who could take advantage of his absence.
As previously mentioned Gerðr’s debut in Skírnismál as an active protagonist does
not appear until stanza 14. Her part of the conversation only covers 6 stanzas, and then
she is again silenced.70 Despite her rather small amount of speech, a distinct picture is
drawn by the female herself. Gerðr meets the arriving stranger with hospitality by
offering him mead in her hall, “inn bið þú hann ganga/ í okkarn sal/ ok drekka inn mæra
miǫð”71. Nevertheless, her words convey that she is acting counterintuitively, and by that
maintaining her composure, as Gerðr utters afterwards “-þó ek hitt óumk/ at hér úti sér/
minn bróðurbani.”72 The female’s presentiment that the stranger’s visit might not be
based on good intentions is further highlighted by her questions about his identity in
stanza 17.73
Without revealing his identity, Skírnir directly starts the wooing to win Gerðr for
Freyr. The first attempt employs the golden apples of the goddess Iðunn74 which are “a
symbol of immortality and love”75. This is accompanied by a second endeavour, involving
the golden ring Draupnir76 “that drips new gold rings every ninth night, an image of
67
In line with this interpretation would also be the idea of a gilded cage.
Skm 12.
69
It is indeed eligible to raise the question if this applies likewise to Freyr or if the shepherd is aware of
Skírnir’s representative function.
70
In total eight stanzas can be allocated to Gerðr. Besides the discussed stanzas, these stanzas are 37 and
39.
71
Skm 16.
72
Skm 16.
73
“Hvat er þat álfa/ né ása sona/ né vís[s]a vana?/ Hví þú einn um komt/ eikinn fúr yfir/ ór salkynni at
siá?”.
74
The story of Iðunn is told in Gylf 26.
75
Ursula Dronke, “Art and Tradition in Skírnismál,” in English and Medieval Studies – Presented to J. R.R.
Tolkien on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, ed. Norman Davis and Charles L. Wrenn (London:
George Allen & Unwin, 1962), 252.
76
Draupnir is mentioned in Gylf 49, and in Skskm 35.
68
23
constant renewal and resource”77. Prima facie, these valuables could be understood as
ordinary wooing gifts to fawn on, and eventually persuade the female. In respect of the
subsequent events, it certainly seems most likely that these precious offers are part of a
well organised and planned underlying procedure. The aim of this is not simply to win
Gerðr’s heart but rather to bend the giantess to Skírnir’s (Freyr’s), and thus man’s, will
in order to establish a conjugal union between her and the vanr. Thus, both the apples and
the ring represent the mundr of the Old Norse mythological world: They do not merely
entail an amount of money that was paid by the future husband’s family to the female’s
marriage guardian, but rather were of a very high mythological significance. Skírnir’s
course of action is doubtless of a strategically sophisticated nature.
Considering that Gymir is absent, Skírnir directly ‘offers’ the mundr to Gerðr
herself.78 In doing so the servant ignores not only the actual decisional power of Gerðr’s
custodian but also Gerðr’s own opinion as he does not request Gerðr to contemplate a
relationship with Freyr. Instead Skírnir literally claims the giantess’ consent.79
The female, however, refuses both times while responding in stanza 20 “Epli ellilyfs/
ek þigg aldregi/ at mannzkis munom,/ né vit Frey[r], meðan okkart fǫr lifir,/ byggiom
bæði saman.”, and stanza 22 “Baug ek þikkak -/ þótt brendr sé/ með ungom Óðins syni./
Era mér gullz vant/ í gǫrðum Gymis,/ at deila fé fǫður.” She clarifies unambiguously that
Skírnir and Freyr, and respectively any other man, will never possess her like an object,
and that she rejects a conjugal union with Freyr outright. Moreover, Gerðr highlights her
father’s riches, which she relies on and is pleased with, as she is his only child and will
probably inherit them someday.80 As was already mentioned in chapter 5, a son was
usually the lawful heir of parental possessions. According to Grágás, in rare cases even
a daughter could assume this function: “[…] Nú er eigi sonur til, þá skal dóttir.”81 In
other words, should anything happen to Gymir Gerðr could become a surrogated son, and
Dronke, “Art and Tradition,” 252/253.
Gymir has neither a speaking part in the poem nor does Skírnir act hasty nor seems the servant to be
worried of the father’s return. The poem does not provide any information about Gymir’s whereabouts.
79
“Neither Grágás nor the oldest provincial Norwegian laws contain stipulations about seeking women’s
approval for marriage but specify that fathers or other male relatives were responsible for the betrothal
and marriage of their womenfolk.”, Jenny Jochens, “Consent in Marriage: Old Norse Law, Life, And
Literature,” Scandinavian Studies 58 (1986): 143/144.
80
von See, Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 2, 100; 104.
81
Gg, Erfðaþáttur, 47.
77
78
24
thus could inherit from her father as no other member of the first tier existed in accordance
with the phrase “[…] better a son who is your daughter than no son at all.”82
This fundamental refusal of the wooing gifts causes, instead of an ordinary approval,
threats of violence and thus a change of Skírnir’s strategy: “Sér þú þenna mæki, mær,/
mjóvan, málfán, […]/ Hǫfuð hǫggva/ ek mun þér hálsi af,/ nema þú mér sætt segir.”83
And yet, Gerðr does not give in, “Ánauð þola/ ek vil aldregi/ at mannykis munom-”84
which causes a second menace directed at Gerðr’s family: “Sér þú þenna mæki, mær,/
mjóvan, málfán, […]/Fyr þessum eggjum/ hnígr sá inn aldni jǫtunn,/ verðr þinn feigr
faðir.”85 As Helga Kress proposes in her article Taming the Shrew: The Rise of Patriarchy
and the Subordination of the Feminine in Old Norse Literature (2002), the conquest of
the female represents an initiation ritual into manhood. To become established in a male
dominated society is inevitable for Freyr.86 The use of violence, and in particular the
intimidation with a sword, Kress argues, is a typical manner in which a woman is bent to
men’s will: “With the sword men keep women in check. With it they tame the shrew.”87
That is exactly what can be observed in Skírnismál: Skírnir threatens Gerðr not once, but
twice with a weapon that stands for male power, and a weapon which women made no
use as it rather served to conquer females.88
Gerðr is immediately cut short after her confident words in stanza 24.89 The
following stanzas 25-36 constitute a rather prominent monologue since it comprises
threats against several levels or spheres of the female’s life and her self-conception.90
However, the section is probably most outstanding due to Gerðr’s silence. The silencing
of a female is a recurring pattern within Old Norse literature, especially in the context of
Clover, “Regardless of Sex,” 5.
Skm 23.
84
Skm 24.
85
Skm 25.
86
Helga Kress, “Taming the Shrew: The Rise of Patriarchy and the Subordination of the Feminine in Old
Norse Literature,” in Cold Counsel: Women in Old Norse Literature and Mythology, ed. Sarah May
Anderson and Karen Swenson (New York: Garland, 2002), 83.
87
Ibid., 89.
88
Ibid., 83, 90.
89
It is obvious that Gerðr’s words carry no weight for Skírnir as he does not take them into account. Ibid.,
82.
90
Joseph Harris, “Cursing With the Thistle: ‘Skírnismál’ 31, 6-8, and OE Metrical Charm 9, 16-17,” in The
Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology, ed. Paul Acker and Carolyne Larrington (New York and
London: Routledge, 2002), 86.
82
83
25
gaining superiority over women.91 Carol Clover states that “[…] tongue wielding is a
conspicuously female activity. But it also acknowledges the commensurability of the
tongue and the sword.”92 She further proposes that “the tongue may be a lesser weapon,
the ‘sword’ of the unswordworthy, but it is a weapon nonetheless, and one whose effects
could be serious indeed.”93 In other words, while cutting the giantess short, Skírnir
disarms the female in a metaphorical sense. He takes away her voice, which is her only
weapon to defend herself and to express her independence, confidence, and own will.
The following monologue is featured by a curse that “creates for the accursed a
negative of the hoped-for or expected world, reflecting inversely the normal world of the
curser and his victim.”94 Its efficacy is strengthened by employing the recurring use of
oxymora in order to underline the hopelessness Gerðr is going to face if she is not willing
to cooperate. In stanza 26-35, Skírnir threatens the giantess with invisibility, isolation and
the lack of appetite. In addition to that, public attention in form of staring, sadness,
compulsion and grief, physical torture, randomness, a three-headed husband or no
husband at all, unsatisfied desire, and the wrath of the gods Freyr, Óðinn, and Þórr
continue the menaces. As if this was not enough, Skírnir also denies Gerðr any sexual
pleasure, and threatens her with living close to the realm of the dead as well as to drink
goat’s urine. He finally menaces to carve a þ (þurs, stanza 37),95 a letter which is closely
connected with women’s misery. Since it also stands for a link between Gerðr and the
giant Hrímgrímnir, it had an especially strong effect on Gerðr.96
Carol Clover then lists several insults that appear in so-called flytings to which belong
senna and mannjafnaðr. Among them are the assault on the opponent’s appearance (“At
undrsjónum þú verðir” stanza 28), sexual irregularity (“þitt geð grip,/ þik morn morni;”
stanza 31) as well as the consumption of tabooed things (“þér […] geita hland gefi;/ œðri
drykkju/ fá þú aldregi,” stanza 35). All of these are uttered to demonstrate the inferiority
of the insulted. Both men and women could accuse each other in such actions for
Kress, “Taming the Shrew,” 85. Kress refers to examples from the fornaldarsögur, legendary romances
but also from the Íslendingasögur.
92
Clover, “Regardless of Sex,” 15/16.
93
Ibid.
94
Harris, “Cursing With the Thistle,” 85.
95
Skírnir mentions a twig with which he wants to tame Gerðr in stanza 26. This is presumably the object
on which Skírnir threatens to carve the rune.
96
von See, Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 2, 134/135. Helga Kress, however, interprets
Gerðr’s reaction as a plain and simple capitulation to Skírnir. Kress, “Taming the Shrew,” 82.
91
26
defamation but “[…] a woman in either role [insulter or insultee] usually faces off
against a man, not another woman, and although she may score a lot of direct hits, in the
end she always loses.”97 In Skírnimsál, too, the giantess has no chance to emerge
victorious from the conversation: Gerðr has to give in and to accept her fate.
The last part of the poem (stanza 37-39) then displays that the female is overcome by
Skírnir’s threats. The curse unsettled the giantess so much that she ‘froze’, and started to
treat Skírnir like a guest. Not before the threats reached their climax does Gerðr collects
herself, and finally finds her voice again: “Heill ver þú nú heldr, sveinn,/ ok tak við
hrímkálki/ fullom forns miaðar/-þó hafða ek þat ætlat,/ at myndak aldregi/ unna vaningia
vel.”98 But yet, the legate is still not completely satisfied with the effect of his words, and
forces the female to make a point about a time and place for meeting Freyr. It seems his
errand is not accomplished until Gerðr makes a promise that resembles a betrothal. The
giantess eventually agrees to meet Freyr at the end of nine nights in a grove called Barri
“þar min Njarðar syni/ Gerðr unna gamans.”99 The female’s obtained commitment
consequently contains the second and the third elements that lead to matrimony: festar,
and a date for a bryllaup, and thus Skírnir’s mission is eventually completed.
The giantess’ giving in is accompanied by the act of speaking about herself in the
third person, “mun […]Gerðr unna gammans”100, which emphasises the transition from
a once strong and independent women to a now subservient and weak character. It seems
likely that Gerðr was broken by the cursing, and became a figure that does not resemble
the former Gerðr anymore.
Helga Kress addresses the attempts at defence of female characters in Old Norse
literature as well, and finally concludes:
[…] strong women in Old Norse literature […] are not free. But they are strong,
and their strength consists in resisting oppression – they refuse to be oppressed.
They do not succeed, but their protest is everywhere in the text.101
At this stage it seems appropriate to raise the question of whether the female
protagonist ever had a choice. And furthermore whether she ever was autonomous in her
choice of a husband or if she only thought herself that way, and therefore deceived herself.
Clover, “Regardless of Sex,” 8.
Skm 37.
99
Skm 39.
100
Skm 39.
101
Kress, “Taming the Shrew,” 91.
97
98
27
5.3 Interim Conclusion
The above conducted study has shown that the elements that lead to matrimony, mundr,
festar, and brullaup are embedded even in the mythological narrative of the Eddic poem
Skírnismál. The same applies to the associated regulations and laws which can be found
in medieval Icelandic legal texts. It seems most likely that Gerðr never had an actual
personal choice of a husband nor was she (ever) independent. Instead she was patronised
by her father Gymir who acted as her marriage guardian, and had to subordinate to his
safety precautions. As a female giantess, Gerðr could be traded like an object between
the individual social classes, no limits were set regarding courtship to win a woman.
Skírnir starts his wooing on behalf of Freyr with gifts to win Gerðr’s affection.
As this strategy proves to be unpromising, he progresses to threats of violence against
the female as well as her family. When this attempt also fails, Skírnir adopts more drastic
measures: in the truest sense of the word he disarms the giantess by taking away her only
weapon, her voice and starts threatening to dash all her wishes and desires. This finally
leads to Gerðr’s pledge to a conjugal union with Freyr. In following the customs of the
patriarchal Old Norse society, this is a consent that is achieved by force rather than by
desire or the pursuit of love.
28
6. Alvíssmál – To Lead the Bride Home or Not
6.1 Alvíssmál – Tradition and Content
The Eddic poem Alvíssmál is the last of the mythological lays that are preserved in the
Codex Regius. Thereafter follows the second section which is comprised by the heroic
poems. The name Alvíssmál is provided by the poem itself as the manuscript exhibits the
words “alviS mal” at the end of its first verse.102 Apart from this, stanza 20 and 30 are
quoted in Snorri Sturluson’s Skáldskaparmál chapters 59 and 63.
Alvíssmál starts in medias res with the dialogue between the dwarf Alvíss (“Allknowing” or “All-wise”) and the áss Þórr. The dialogue is featured by alternating
speeches of one stanza per character, and a verbal exchange of insults to demonstrate the
right for the female. Stanzas 8 and 9 are both spoken solely by Þórr, and thus denote the
transition from the frame story (stanza 1-8, 35) to the wisdom contest (stanza 9-34). In
total Þórr states 13 questions, and all of them are answered by his opponent Alvíss.
Alvíssmál can be referred to as wisdom poetry although it does not involve mythological
wisdom or rules of life but rather focuses on language(s) itself.103 The poem is almost
exclusively composed in ljóðaháttr.
From Alvíssmál, the reader learns that the dwarf Alvíss has been engaged to Þórr’s
daughter whose name is not referred to. Now the future husband wants to take home his
bride, an action that Þórr tries to avert because he had not been around when the betrothal
between dwarf and ásynja took place. As the father of the bride, Þórr claims the right to
marry his daughter off according to his demands. This, again, leads to a one-sided wisdom
contest (conducted by Þórr), and finally to the dwarf’s death caused by trickery.
6.2 The Final Authority – The Bride’s Father
Although scholars have studied Alvíssmál from different angles (with focus on the
wisdom contest, wording, and interaction between frame story and wisdom contest),104
von See, Klaus et al., Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 3: Götterlieder – Volundarkvið,
Alvíssmál, Baldrs draumar, Rígsþula, Hyndlolióð, Grottasongr (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter,
2000), 268.
103
Ibid., 287.
104
For example Moberg, Klingenberg etc.
102
29
little attention has been drawn to the unnamed character in the poem, Þórr’s daughter,
and the contained conjugal elements and behaviour patterns.
Skáldskaparmál 12 informs that Þórr is the father of the ásynja Þrúðr, as is said here:
“Hvernig skal kenna Þór? Svá at kalla hann [...] faðir Magna ok Móða ok Þrúðar [...].”105
Aside from this, Þrúðr is mentioned in the Skaldic poem Ragnarsdrápa, where her name
appears in connection with the giant Hrungnir who is called “Þrúðar þjófr”106 (“thief of
Þrúðr”). Based on this, it seems most likely that Þórr had only one daughter and that
Alvíssmál refers to the same ásynja although her name is not revealed here. Both speakers,
Alvíss and Þórr, who are also unnamed until stanza 3 and 6, denote the female character
in stanzas 1, 2 and 4 as “brúðr” (“bride”). The word brúðr features a strong analogy to
the assumed name Þrúðr, as only the initial letters b and þ differ from each other.
Even though both speakers are unaware of each other’s identity, Þórr compares the
wooer Alvíss to a giant and clarifies that as such he was unworthy to marry the already
betrothed girl: “[...] Þúrsa líki/ þykki mér á þér vera;/ ertattu til brúðar borinn.”107 Not
until the stranger has introduced himself with the words “Alvíss ek heiti”108 and revealed
his dwelling place as well as his intentions does the bride’s father recognise him as a
dwarf rather than a giant.109 The dwarf moreover highlights the meaning of such a promise
that was already made to him: “bregði engi fǫstu heiti fira.”110
As Þórr has not revealed himself as the bride’s father, it seems evident that Alvíss
emphasises that betrothals were binding on all parties. In compliance to Grágás the
breaking off of an engagement entails that the future spouse could claim expected costs
for the wedding feast as well as the mundr that his family paid for the bride.111 The bride’s
Skskm 4; Skskm 21 also refers to Sif, Þórr‘s wife, as “móðir Þrúðar”.
von See, Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 3, 274. The myth of the rape of Þrúr is solely
mentioned in Ragnarsdrápa, and is not referred to in other sources. For further readings on Ragnarsdrápa
see Rolf Stavnem, “The Kennings in Ragnarsdrápa,” Medieval Scandinavia 14 (2004): 161-184.
107
Alv 2.
108
Ibid.
109
In accordance with other written accounts, giants tend to lust for the goddesses; e.g. in Haustlǫng 8-11
the giant Þjazi rapes Iðunn; The Haustlǫng of Þjóðólfr of Hvinir. Edited by Richard North. Enfield Lock:
Hisarlik Press, 1997, 4-6; Vsp 25 and Gylf 42 thematise the giving away of Óðr’s girl respectively Freyja
to the giants; in Þrk the giant Þrymr claims Freyja as his bride in exchange for Þórr’s hammer Mjölnir.
Another instance for dwarfs seeking for a goddess can be found in Sǫrla þáttr. Here four dwarfs urge
intercourse with Freyja for a golden ring they crafted for her. Sǫrla þáttr in Flateyjarbók I, ed. Sigurður
Nordal (Reykjavík: Flateyjarútgáfan, 1944), 303-314.
110
Alv 3.
111
Gg, Festaþáttur 7, 113.
105
106
30
father could likewise reclaim the already paid dowry in case the future husband himself
would terminate the engagement.112
Þórr, nevertheless, wants to break off the engagement between the dwarf and his
daughter as he was absent when their promises were made: “Ek mun bregða,/ þvíat ek
brúðar á/ flest um ráð sem faðir./ Varka ek heima,/ þá er þér heitit var,/ at sá einn er
gjǫfir með goðum.”113 According to the law texts it was not possible to deprive Þórr, as
the father of the bride, of his right to dispose her of in marriage. As Þórr himself did not
promise Þrúðr to Alvíss he evidently is in power to terminate the engagement or cancel
the wedding without any legal consequences. “En ef sá maður fastnar konu er eigi er
lögráðandi, þá varðar hinum ekki er lögráðandi er þó að hann renni ráðunum, og svo og
öðrum mönnum.”114
In contrast to Skírnismál the poem Alvíssmál leaves the reader in the dark about
possible circumstances that might have led to the engagement between ásynja and dwarf.
Thus, it seems conceivable that the wooer Alvíss used a similar approach as Skírnir did
above, although a non-violent persuasion based “merely” on bribery by employing gifts
could be presumed. Additionally, even love, or at least affection, is to be considered in
this case. For Alvíssmál, however, only suppositions can be made as the preceding
courtship is completely omitted.
Henceforth the female who is the centre of attention is not referred to as “brúðr”
anymore. Instead Alvíss calls her “fljóðs ins fagrlóa”115 and “it mjallhvíta man”116, two
characterisations that only refer to the girl’s outward appearance. Klaus von See points
out that the second attribute, “mjallhvíta” is presumably a varying resumption of the
former description “fagrlóa”, and relates to the female’s bright skin if not her fair hair.
To describe a woman’s skin and emphasise its brightness was a stylistic device to
underline her noble derivation.117 A similar utterance is expressed by Freyr in Skírnimsál
6, where he describes the giantess Gerðr as a female with “armar lýstu/ en af þaðan/ allt
112
Gg, Festaþáttur 7, 113.
Alv 4.
114
Gg, Festaþáttur 8, 114.
115
Alv 5.
116
Alv 7.
117
von See, Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 3, 319.
113
31
lopt ok lǫgr.”118 Alvíss, as well as Freyr, explains very metaphorically how much the
physical appearance of the female affected him and caused in him such desire for her.119
Þórr, however, makes no reference to his daughter’s appearance but rather
characterises her as “unga man”,120 as he has, unlike the dwarf, no sexual interest in her.
Alvíss’ conspicuously strong desire for Þrúðr finds expression in stanza 7: “eiga vilja,/
heldr en án vera,/ þat it mjallhvíta man.”121 The attitude that is revealed by the dwarf is
somewhat exceptional, and would instead be expected from a giant or a berserk.122 Dwarfs
have a very restricted role within the Old Norse mythology and even the written sources
themselves proclaim that there is not much known about them.
Ármann Jakobsson emphasises the problems of the portrayal of dwarfs in his article
The Hole: Problems in Medieval Dwarfology (2005), and highlights that these
supernatural beings are of a negative nature. According to Ármann, dwarfs are labelled
by absence rather than presence as they have an enigmatic identity and their lives are
concealed. In addition to that, one can also learn from the written accounts that dwarfs
are, indeed, rather short (in terms of their body size), and that there are no female
representatives among them.123 The sources also claim that dwarfs are linked to the
making of the mead of poetry124, and that they work as smiths to provide treasures for the
æsir. Thus, dwarfs seem to have only one function within the mythological narratives: to
serve the gods. They are pictured as asexual and without any need for females.125
It is therefore all the more astonishing that Alvíss courts Þrúðr and acts as a persistent
wooer or fiancé who wants to lead an ásynja home.126 Þórr’s wondrousness about a dwarf
who attempts to marry his daughter is implied in his comment about Alvíss in stanza 2 in
which he compares him with a giant: “Þursa líki/ þykki mér á þér vera;”. Not only does
Alvíss seem to show a similar outward appearance with giants but he also acts like one.
118
Skm 6.
See chapter 5.2.
120
Alv 6.
121
Alv 7.
122
See footnote 105 on giants seeking for goddesses rather than dwarfs. Ármann Jakobsson, “The Hole:
Problems in Medieval Dwarfology,” Arv: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore 61 (2005): 61.
123
Ibid., 68.
124
Skskm 1.
125
Liberman, “What Happened to Female Dwarfs?,” 260/261. Already mentioned in chapter 4.3.
126
Paul Acker, “Dwarf-lore in Alvíssmál,” in The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology, ed. Paul
Acker and Carolyne Larrington (New York and London: Routledge, 2002), 215.
119
32
In other words “Alvíss loses the unsociability of dwarfs in other tales when this tale
demands he play the role of sexual interloper.”127
This is, however, not the only inconsistency that can be observed within the poem.
Paul Acker moreover states that Þórr’s function stands in contrast with his usual
responsibility. Instead of gaining something from his opponent, the áss has to avert the
dwarf’s intention to abduct his daughter from his homestead.128
Another outstanding difference to Þórr’s ‘usual’ behaviour which mainly encompasses
the slaying of trolls and giants to avert any danger from the gods and humans is his role
as a wisdom gaining character. Þórr demands that Alvíss has to answer all of his questions
in the form of a wisdom contest to become Þrúðr’s legal husband. “Meyjar ástum/ muna
þér verða,/ vísi gestr, of varit,/ ef þú ór heimi kannt/ hverjum at segja/ allt þat er ek vil
vita.”129 The contest finally ends when Þórr outwits Alvíss by distracting him so much
that the dwarf is heedless of the dawn. This, eventually, becomes his downfall. In other
words both agents undertake a task that contradicts the actual depiction which Old Norse
mythology ascribes them elsewhere.
Now that the male speaking characters in Alvíssmál and their actions have been
analysed, the source for the dialogue should be brought back into focus: Þórr’s daughter,
the assumed Þrúðr. As already observed, the poem does not mention the female character
by her name but only identifies her through her father’s descent. Additionally, Þrúðr has
no active performance within the poem. Instead the two males negotiate about her as if
she was not present.
The ásynja’s own position seems of no significance either. Whether or not she loves
the dwarf and wants to leave with him, and also the question of whether or not he tried to
abduct her while her father was away, are not discussed at any point in the poem. Instead
the girl is voiceless and has no bearing on the happenings. All the information the reader
gains about her is based on the descriptions of the dwarf and her lineage. The few
references about Þrúðr are illustrated from a male angle, and basically concern the
female’s appearance. The illustrated gaps and silences of the frame story, along with the
dominating behaviour of Þórr underline prevalent social norms amongst the æsir, and
between the æsir and other supernatural beings: A strong superiority of the male over the
Paul Acker, “Dwarf-lore in Alvíssmál,” 217.
Ibid.
129
Alv 8.
127
128
33
female particularly the father’s decisional power over his daughter, as well as the social
domination of the æsir can be recognised. The matrimony between Þrúðr and the dwarf
Alvíss was a prohibited alliance that encompasses the hypogamy of the ásynja. In
accordance with the rules among the mythological beings such a connection was beyond
dispute as ásynjur were only allowed to marry male æsir to maintain the supremacy of
the gods within the mythological universe. A union between Þrúðr and Alvíss, however,
would have endangered the mythological ‘balance’ involving a loss of power for the æsir.
This was a very similar situation to the event of a marriage between an ásynja and a giant.
An incident that by all means had to be averted.
6.3 Interim Conclusion
The above conducted textual analysis has shown that the Eddic lay Alvíssmál also features
conjugal elements that can be found in the Icelandic law codex Grágás. Here the focus is
on the guardianship as well as on both festar and brullaup, whereas mundr is left out.
Þórr has been away when his daughter Þrúðr was promised to the dwarf Alvíss, but
the legal guardian of the bride insists on his right to choose Þrúðr’s husband which leads
to a one-sided wisdom contest, and finally to the would-be husband’s death. In this way
not only is Þórr’s power as a father and marriage guardian shown, but also the underlying
social hierarchy that has to be maintained: the god’s supremacy over all other
mythological beings. An ásynja could only marry endogamously but never exogamously
into another social group. Þrúðr, however, could not be traded into the group of dvergar.
Another important marriage element that Alvíssmál highlights is the missing voice of
the bride herself, which is reflected in Þrúðr’s lacking agency within the whole poem.
All the negotiations are settled among father and future spouse whereas the bride’s
opinion is not considered at all. Again, the superiority of the male over the female is
obvious.
34
7. Þrymskviða – One Bride Is Not Like Another
7.1 Þrymskviða – Tradition and Content
The myth of the stolen hammer is only found in the Eddic poem Þrymskviða, and neither
Snorra Edda nor Skaldic poetry refer to it. Although the loss of Þórr’s hammer is not
mentioned elsewhere, the poem makes use of a specific theme: the deprivation and
regaining of a divine attribute like Iðunn’s apples or Freyja’s necklace.130 In total
Þrymskviða encompasses 33 stanzas which are a combination of both narrative and
dialogical stanzas. The whole lay is composed in fornyrðislag. Unlike Alvíssmál, where
only two figures have an agency, six mythological characters get a chance to speak in
Þrymskviða: Þórr, Loki, Freyja, Heimdallr, Þrymr, and Þrymr’s sister. The most
outstanding feature of the lay is the comicalness of the situations that mock Freyja’s, and
especially Þórr’s sexuality and their closely associated reputation.
The poem starts when Þórr awakens and realises that someone has stolen his hammer
Mjǫllnir. Heedless and distressed he seeks Loki to bring him word about the delicate
situation. Loki borrows Freyja’s feather cloak with which he sets off to giant’s land where
he finds Þrymr, who promptly admits to being the thief of Mjǫllnir, and demands Freyja
as his bride in exchange for the hammer. When Þórr hears about this condition he sets
out to get Freyja, and wishes to take her to the giant Þrymr. Freyja, who would not dream
of giving in to what is requested of her, becomes furious and adamantly rejects the god’s
request. At the suggestion of Heimdallr, however, Þórr disguises himself as a bride and
eventually sets out to giant’s land. Loki accompanies him as his bridesmaid. Later that
evening the wedding feast starts, and when the hammer is brought out and laid into the
bride’s lap for consecration, Þórr reaches for it. He slays both Þrymr and his sister, and
finally reacquires his hammer Mjǫllnir.
7.2 Justified Objections and Their Implications
Since his hammer, the symbol of virility and power, has been stolen, one finds a rather
desperate Þórr in the initial situation of Þrymskviða. With the help of Mjǫllnir, Þórr keeps
the giants at bay and protects the gods and their abodes from their opponents, which are
von See, Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 2, 514. Haustlǫng 9-13 tells of Iðunn’s abduction
as well as the stealing of her apples, and Sǫrla þáttr mentions the theft of Freyja’s necklace gullmen.
130
35
traditionally the giants. When he realises that the hammer has been stolen he is seized by
anger and rage but also by despair. Þórr is dependent on the hammer in order to sustain
the god’s superiority over the giants within the mythological society.131 John McKinnell
refers to Þórr’s anger in his article Myth As Therapy: The Function of Þrymskviða (2014)
as an “impotent anger”132 as his manhood is challenged by trickery. He obviously has no
idea how to regain his weapon.
When Loki flies to Jǫtunheimar the giant Þrymr immediately admits to being in
possession of the hammer and demands Freyja as quid pro quo: “Ek hefi Hlórriða/ hamar
um fólginn,/ átta rǫstom/ fyr jǫrð neðan;/ hann engi maðr/ aptr um heimtir,/ nema fœri
mér/, Freyju at kvæn.”133 It is indeed not new that the giants lust after Freyja, who is the
goddess embodying love, fertility and beauty.134 However, none of the attempts to win
the goddess are ever successful. In this case the giant Þrymr gets too close for comfort to
the gods.
As soon as Loki returns to Þórr he echoes the giant’s claim, and both Þórr and Loki
head off “fagra Freyju at hitta”135. Þórr, however, does not even request Freyja to get
dressed up and marry the giant but rather demands of her to put on a bridal dress and then
start out for Jǫtunheimar with him: “Bittu þik, Freyja,/ brúðar líni,/ vit skulum aka tvau/
í jǫtunheima.”136 The manner the god displays undeniably reflects his helplessness and
sexual insecurity evoked by the loss of the hammer. Þórr’s honour and the gods’ social
rank within the mythological fabric are at stake which is why he urges Freyja to accept
her fate.137 Þórr is probably assumed to be able to exert power over the female, but with
the loss of the hammer he obviously lost also this power.
In contrast to both Alvíssmál and Skírnismál, the female has not only a voice at this
point, as evidenced by the use of her tongue to defend herself from Þórr’s abstruse claim,
but also is heard by the males. This active participation is indeed remarkable as a woman
had no decisional power in choosing a husband but rather had to accept the choice that
131
See chapter 3.2.
John McKinnell, “Myth As Therapy: The Function of Þrymskviða,” in Essays on Eddic Poetry, ed.
Donata Kick and John D. Shafer (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2014), 203.
133
Þrk 8.
134
Gylf 24.
135
Þrk 12.
136
Ibid.
137
Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 181.
132
36
was made by her male relatives: “it was a fate she could do little to avoid, beyond using
her often considerable eloquence to persuade her menfolk to fulfil her wishes.”138
As the poem informs us, the goddess who was helpful and friendly before (stanza 4)
now becomes furious: “Reið varð þá Freyja/ ok fnásaði,/ allr ása salr/ undir bifðisk,/
stǫkk þat it mikla/ men Brísinga:/ ‘Mik veiztu verða/ vergjarnasta,/ ef ek ek með þér/ í
jǫtunheima.’”139 Freya’s wrath finds expression in her snorting as well as the trembling
of the hall and the falling off of her emblem, the necklace Brísingamen. In addition to this
the female utters that she was the greatest nymphomaniac if she would even consider to
marry a giant, as “marriage to a giant represents total denial of a woman’s fecundity and
sexual fulfilment”140. Nevertheless, Freyja’s reaction probably has to be read as an
exaggeration to amuse the audience, and it certainly is one of the comical elements that
can be found in Þrymskviða.
In her article Reading Þrymskviða (2002) Margaret Clunies Ross addresses Freyja’s
concerns about her reputation to be nymphomaniac and she concludes that the goddess
“[…] already has that reputation as numerous other references in Norse mythological
texts attest.”141
The poem further states that the gods are forced to discuss the situation to find a
solution to regain Þórr’s hammer without losing Freyja to Þrymr and the other giants
(stanza 14). For the æsir it is inconceivable to trade Freyja for the hammer as this would
lead to the loss of the gods’ supremacy over the giants.142 For that reason Heimdallr
suggests dressing up Þórr: “Bindu vér Þór þá/ brúðar líni,/ hafi hann it mikla/ men
Brísinga.”143 He moreover adds in stanza 16 “Látum und honum/ hrynja lukla/ ok
kvenváðir/ um kné falla,/ en á brjósti/ breiða steina,/ ok hagliga/ um hǫfuð typpum.”
These words reveal another aspect of the medieval Icelandic marriage customs: bridal
fashion. According to Heimdallr a bride usually wore not only a bridal veil (brúðarlín)
but also jewellery (Brísingamen) that is here used to prove Þórr to be Freyja as it is her
symbol of recognition.144 Another important feature is the keys (luklar) which represented
McKinnell, “Myth as a Therapy,” 207.
Þrk 13.
140
McKinnell, “Myth as a Therapy,” 204. On a related note, McKinnell also mentions Skírnir’s threat
against Gerðr in Skm 31.
141
Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 193. Clunies Ross lists here Ls 29-32 and Hdl 46-47 as examples.
142
Outlined in chapter 3.2.
143
Þrk 15.
144
von See, Kommentar zu den Lieder der Edda – Band 2, 549.
138
139
37
the female’s power inside the house (innan stokks).145 Moreover a bride seemed to have
worn a dress (kvennváðir) as well as a headdress (typpum 146).
Since Þórr himself was outwitted by the giant and thus has experienced “a symbolic
castration”147, he has to straighten things out to the advantage of the æsir even though he
is afraid of the accompanied disgrace by wearing women’s clothing: “Mik munu æsir/
argan kalla/, ef ek bindask læt/ brúðar líni.”148 To make Þórr, the most masculine figure
among the gods dress up like a bride, is to be understood as another comical or parodic
element of the poem. As Freyja was in stanza 13, it is now Þórr who is so concerned
about his masculinity and is worried about being called unmanly (argr).149 There are two
reasons for this: Firstly, the loss of his hammer happened while he was asleep and thus
while he was in a passive state. Secondly, he is supposed to simulate being a woman
which probably is the greatest thinkable humiliation for “þrúðugur áss”150.
In his article Cross-Dressing in the Poetic Edda - Mic muno Æsir argan kalla
(2012), James Frankki surveys Þórr’s cross-dressing and the connected parody albeit the
act itself was tabooed and even penalised in medieval Iceland. He concludes that the
cross-dressing as a literary motif was accepted if the intent was only to deceive and as
such the last resort to maintain society’s order. Moreover, Frankki proposes, the literary
figure had to rehabilitate its former reputation. Clunies Ross, in turn, interprets the crossdressing as a challenge of the prevalent social norms that were based on honour and
shame. Closely linked to these norms were the well-defined gender rules whose boarders
are widened due to Þórr’s and Loki’s cross-dressing.151
However much Þórr tried to avert his ‘own marriage’ with the giant, he has to travel
to giant’s land together with Loki as his bridesmaid. This seems to evoke contradictions
as the wedding usually took place at the bride’s family property. Since the hammer is
buried somewhere in Jǫtunheimar, the gods have no other choice but to send off the bride.
145
Already explained in chapter 4.4; see also Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Women in Old Norse Literature,
18.
146
von See, Kommentar zu den Lieder der Edda – Band 2, 552. Von See suggests adding a missing object,
i.e. faldr “women’s headgear”.
147
Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 188.
148
Þrk 17.
149
“The man who is argr is willing or inclined to play or interested in playing the female part in sexual
relations. It is characteristic of the idea that in this sense it can only be applied to a man.”, Preben
Meulengracht Sørensen, The Unmanly Man – Concepts of Sexual Defamation in Early Northern Society
(Odense: Odense University Press, 1983), 18.
150
Þrk 17.
151
Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 181, 189.
38
Another oddity that is outlined here is the bride’s companion who usually was the father
or a brother rather than only a female bride’s maid. 152 A male marriage attendant in
addition to Þórr’s ‘shameful’ outward appearance may have intensified the god’s
humiliation as he is the áss who embodies strength and power, and thus is not in need of
protection.
In Jǫtunheimar, Þrymr asks the other giants to prepare for the wedding feast (“stráið
bekki”153) and mentions all his treasures among which only Freyja seems to be missing:
“fjǫlð á ek meiðma,/ fjǫlð á ek menja,/ einnar mér Freyju/ ávant þykkir.” 154 According
to these lines, the goddess is clearly considered to be an object to complete the collection
of valuable articles rather than a woman that deserves acknowledgement as a person and
equal subject.
Following this, the poem informs about the wedding feast itself whose climax
displays the consecration of the bride with the hammer. As the banns are called, beer,
meat, fish, and mead are served: “[…] ǫl fram borit./ Einn át oxa,/ átta laxa,/ krásir
allar/[…] drakk Sifjar verr/sáld þrjú mjaðar.”155 Again, Þórr’s behaviour is mocked as
he is dressed like a woman, but obviously does not know how to act like a female
(goddess): “he is an inept drag queen, for he cannot conceal his masculine identity even
under his bridal veil.”156 That, in turn, raises Þrymr’s suspicions in stanza 25: “Hvar
sáttu brúðir/ bíta hvassara?/ Sáka ek brúðir/ bíta breiðara,/ né inn meira mjǫð/ mey um
drekka.”, and stanza 27 when the giant tries to kiss his bride: “Hví eru ǫndótt/ augu
Freyju?/ þykki mér ór augum/ eldr of brenna.” Both times Loki has to step into the breach
to reason the bride’s behaviour or appearance (stanza 26 and 28). The giant, however,
seems to be so smitten with his Freyja, and confident of his success that he wants to
believe those spurious excuses, and does not recognise Þórr.157
In stanza 29 Þrymr’s sister appears at the wedding feast and rather unceremoniously
claims the bride’s dowry (brúðfé) in exchange for her love and reception into her family:
McKinnell, “Myth as Therapy,” 205/206.
Þrk 22; a similar phrase can be found in Alv 1 where Alvíss states to strew benches (“bekki breiða”) as
a preparation of the wedding feast.
154
Þrk 23.
155
Þrk 24.
156
Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 182.
157
McKinnell, “Myth as Therapy,” 206.
152
153
39
“Láttu þér af hǫndum/ hringa rauða,/ ef þú ǫðlask vill/ ástir mínar,/ ástir mínar,/ alla
hylli.”
Following this, another feature of the wedding ceremony is referred to: Þrymr
demands the hammer be brought to consecrate his bride by placing it into her lap: “Berið
inn hamar/ brúði at vígja,/ leggið Mjǫllni/ í meyjar kné,/ vígið okkr saman/ Vára hendi.”
158
At this point Þórr, disguised as Freyja recovers from his insecurity and reaches for
his hammer. With Mjǫllnir in his hands he wins back his former strength. He first slays
the giant Þrymr, and then the rest of the present giants, as well as the giant’s greedy sister:
“[…] Þrym drap han fyrstan,/[…] ok ætt jǫtuns/ alla lamði”159 and “Drap hann ina
ǫldnu/ jǫtna systur,/ hin er brúðfjár/ of beðit hafði;/ hon skell um hlaut/ fyr skillinga,/ en
hǫgg hamars/ fyr hringa fjǫlð.”160 By doing so, Þórr demonstrates not only his power but
also rehabilitates his damaged reputation, a requirement that granted exemption for the in
other ways ‘shameful’ cross-dressing: “Svá kom Óðins sonr/ endr at hamri.”161
7.3 Interim Conclusion
The survey of Þrymskviða has outlined additional elements and characteristics of the
(mythological) marriage. In this Eddic poem the emphasis is on the wedding ceremony
(brullaup) itself and its related peculiarities. Mundr and festar, however, go unheeded as
the events are based on the stealing of the hammer Mjǫllnir which instead leads to an
arranged marriage ceremony. Þrymskviða provides information about the bridal fashion
including a veil, jewellery, and a headdress as well as the served food which included
beef, fish, mead and beer. Moreover the consecration of the bride is mentioned, a
consecration in which the hammer Mjǫllnir is used. But yet, a few inconsistencies can be
observed: As already stated, there is no mundr paid by the future husband. Instead, the
bride’s dowry is outright claimed by the sister-in-law. Furthermore, the ceremony does
not take place at the bride’s family abode but in Jǫtunheimar where Þrymr lives. A last
158
Þrk 30.
Þrk 31.
160
Þrk 32.
161
Þrk 33.
159
40
outstanding oddness is that the bride is not accompanied by a male marriage guardian but
only by her bridesmaid.
These discrepancies, certainly, are based on the fact that the æsir send Þórr instead
of Freyja to ‘marry’ Þrymr. In comparison to Gerðr in Skírnismál and Þrúðr in Alvíssmál,
Freyja has an actual choice and gets the chance to use her voice to express her opposition
against marrying a giant in order to regain Þórr’s hammer. Freyja, hence, is in the
position to choose her husband or at least to reject a decision someone else made for her,
a position that nevertheless is grounded on the negative reciprocity to hold the giants at
bay and maintain the god’s supremacy within the mythological society.
41
8. Conclusion and Further Perspectives
The wish to marry, in accordance with the mythological poems Skírnismál, Alvíssmál and
Þrymskviða, was not always accompanied by the consent of both parties, the bride and
her family on one side, and the potential husband on the other. Instead, concerns such as
maintaining an existing hierarchy or supremacy of one social group or character over the
other was of greater importance than someone’s personal opinions, desires or feelings.
In the course of this, three different kinds of influence can be observed: First and
foremost, the male subjecting the female. Secondly the æsir as head of the social
hierarchy within the mythological world and their attempts to ensure this position. And
finally, the head of the family usually represented by the father and his guardianship of
his daughter.
In Þrymskviða it is Þórr who pressures Freyja to accommodate him by smoothing
away difficulties that come along with the loss of his hammer. Þórr seems persuaded to
be in a position to dispose of the goddess in marriage with the giant Þrymr. Perturbed by
the fear of losing his reputation and power Þórr demands the unthinkable from Freyja: to
agree to a marriage with a giant. The close analysis of Skírnismál also shows that it is the
male that overcomes the female: Skírnir threatens the giantess Gerðr until she accepts her
fate and realises that a female has to comply once a man utters a demand. In Alvíssmál,
again, the female Þrúðr seems to have no say in choosing her husband, and thus, she is
completely at her father, a male’s, mercy.
The dominance of the gods finds expression in Alvíssmál since Þórr denies the dwarf
Alvíss his request to marry his daughter. A marriage between the dwarf Alvíss and the
ásynja Þrúðr was an arrangement that endangered the æsir’s primacy position, and
consequently, this was to be averted. A similar situation is reflected in Skírnismál. The
vanr Freyr falls in love with the giantess Gerðr and his servant Skírnir sets off to persuade
the female, who seems to have no interest in the god. Skírnir pulls out all the stops to
bend Gerðr’s will and to give assurance to her meeting with Freyr.
The father’s guardianship is described in Skírnismál and Alvíssmál. Skírnismál
informs us about Gymir’s safety precautions to protect Gerðr from strangers. Her
dwelling place is surrounded by fences and dogs that are meant to scare away arriving
strangers. In Alvíssmál, Þórr tells Alvíss in no uncertain terms that the decisional power
42
over his daughter Þrúðr resides in him. Without Þórr’s approval no wooer can take Þrúðr
home.
The hierarchical thinking that is expressed in the mythological poems is also reflected
in the laws of medieval Iceland. Grágás informs that a couple had to be jafnræði to marry
and that in general the father (or brother) of a woman was her guardian. Only with the
guardian’s permission could a wedding take place. Moreover, the examples have shown
that marriages were important alliances to preserve the social order and could decide the
future status of a family. Therefore, matrimony was employed to avoid or settle
disagreements or feuds between families and could contribute to negotiating peace.
In these premises, the interests of the family were of greater value than personal
choice or romantic feelings, which were rarely taken into account. Matrimony was an
important tool, and as part of it the woman was employed like a means to an end.
According to both mythological and legal sources the woman had no say in the matter
while the father or the future husband could cancel a proposed wedding. Moreover, the
father’s consent was imperative.
The behaviour patterns that are associated with entering into the bond of marriage
are also shaped by the above mentioned supremacy of the male over the female. In that
regard it seems that the male stops at nothing to win a female or protect her from a
potentially “unsuitable” husband. In Þrymskviða, this is expressed in the form of trickery
and stealing which ultimately paves the way for the marriage of Þrymr and Freyja. In the
same poem, deception (Þórr’s cross-dressing) and violence (Þórr’s smashing of the giant
and his family) are described actions intended to prevent this alliance. Skírnismál, again,
exhibits courtship featured by wooing gifts (Iðunn’s apples and the golden ring Draupnir)
and the use of threats of a violent nature against Gerðr, her family and her desires. Skírnir
does not flinch from applying curses against the female and even disarms the giantess by
silencing her. A similar situation is reflected in Alvíssmál since Þrúðr is completely
voiceless while father and future spouse negotiate her fate.
According to these examples women had to be obedient, as this was an expected
behaviour on behalf of the female. A man could bend a woman to his will, and thereby,
he could employ all available funds since everything seemed to be allowed or at least
tolerated. At the same time it is safe to say that the male part of the (mythological) society
was aware of the females’ wishes, hopes, and fears. To advance towards these desires,
43
women could only use their voices. As soon as a male figure felt threatened by a woman’s
words, he would disarm her by silencing her (i.e., in Skírnismál). Or, to make sure that
such a situation would not emerge, the female simply would not get a chance to speak at
all (i.e., Alvíssmál) since her opinion is not of any significance within the patriarchal Old
Norse system.
However, the myths cover more than only the orders of priorities and behaviour
patterns. The main conditions mundr, festar and brullaup, which had to be fulfilled for a
legal marriage to take place, are also contained in the poems. Þrymskviða provides
information about the brullaup (“wedding feast”) at Þrymr’s dwelling place. The food
which was served as well as the bridal fashion are both described, and the consecration
of the bride is also mentioned. Since the wedding is triggered by the theft of the hammer,
the starting situation for a wedding is an unorthodox one, and consequently,
contradictions to the regular course of events can be registered. The mundr (“bride’s
wealth”) undeniably occurs in Skírnismál in the form of the wooing gifts, and even festar
(“betrothals”) are found when Gerðr finally agrees to meet Freyr.
Grágás as a conglomeration of laws from the Icelandic Free State period (9301262/64) is not a unified body of law. Moreover it is not to assume that all laws and
regulations contained therein were in use at all, or even valid at the same time. In fact the
preserved laws presumably originated in different times. In that regard both Grágás and
the Poetic Edda resemble one another: the laws as well as the myths were recorded after
Christianity arrived in Iceland but are believed to contain and reflect pre-Christian
traditions that were handed down orally for a long time, and thus most probably
underwent a multitude of changes.
What is more astonishing is that in terms of matrimony so many parallels can be
drawn to make realistic claims about the features of the subsequent medieval Icelandic
society. And yet, it seems impossible to make any assumptions as to which of these
patterns may derive from a pre-Christian time and which ones from a later Christian time.
Myths had to adapt to new circumstances to maintain their significance to society and to
be remembered. Otherwise mythological narratives dwindled away. Laws that were not
improved or adjusted to the given conditions underwent the same adaptive process or
were also lost or dismissed over time.
44
The above conducted analysis may allow us to draw conclusions about the
investigated texts and the time of their recording. Oral tradition, the change of religion,
and also, writing caused many changes and adaptations over a long period of time.
Therefore, it is questionable if general valid statements for the medieval Icelandic society
can be made.
These reflections on mythological narratives lead us to a question that was raised at
the onset of this thesis: Why would Christian scribes retell stories about gods and other
supernatural beings that contradicted their own ideology and faith?
In fact, the gods, their opponents and their social order constituted an important part
of Iceland’s traditional culture and were firmly established in the minds of the people.
After the conversion to Christianity, the Old Norse myths were considered as a medium
to demonstrate the limitation of the pre-Christian gods’ power. This is notably expressed
in their decisions and deeds which are not always of an anticipatory or wise nature. At
the same time the myths were excellent vehicles to thematise social concerns as well as
cultural apprehensions such as the maintaining of social hierarchies and the superiority
of the male over the female (as shown). Another explanation for the multitude of written
accounts dealing with the pre-Christian past could be Iceland’s late conversion, as well
as the missing royal influence in this process. The scribes’ personal interest in their
country’s past, however, could also have led to the recording of stories about the gods.162
Whatever inspired the Christian scribes to compile these narratives, the arrival of
Christianity, certainly, did not mark their ending. Instead, the stories were adapted to the
new normative structures, and they may have been used to reveal the shortcomings of the
pre-Christian deities.163
It is indeed conceivable to extend the scope of these considerations. To start with, further
Eddic poems could be considered to create a more comprehensive picture of matrimony
and associated behaviour patterns within the Poetic Edda. In Vafþrúðnismál, for instance,
Óðinn asks his wife for advice about visiting the giant Vafþúðnir. Although Frigg
discourages him from meeting the giant, Óðinn sets off to his abode. Here the relation
between wife and husband could be more closely examined. The same applies to
Paul Acker, “Introduction,” xii.
This, as Margaret Clunies Ross argues, finds expression especially in the comical elements of the Eddic
poem Þrymskviða, but also in further narratives. Clunies Ross, “Reading Þrymskviða,” 183/184.
162
163
45
Lokasenna since here Loki incriminates the goddesses and gods present, and not all of
them come to their spouse’s defence. Moreover, examples from Snorra Edda could be
regarded, as well as examples from the genre of the Icelandic saga.
All three female characters Þrúðr, Gerðr and even Freyja are trapped in the social
fabrics of the Old Norse mythological world that is controlled by the male gods. None of
them have an actual say in the choice of their husbands. Especially in Skírnismál it is
demonstrated that Gerðr has to give in and accept her fate. But what was the value of a
life, already characterised by heteronomy, if one could not even maintain one’s personal
hopes and desires? Gerðr loses her supposed independence in the reader’s eyes, but keeps
her dignity, a virtue of much greater importance.
46
Bibliography
Primary Sources and English Translations
Eddukvæði 1, Goðakvæði. Edited by Jónas Kristjánsson and Vésteinn Ólason. Reykjavík:
Hið Íslenzka Fornritfélag, 2014.
Flateyjarbók I. Edited by Sigurður Nordal. Reykjavík: Flateyjarútgáfan, 1944.
Grágás – Lagasafn íslenska þjóðveldisins. Edited by Gunnar Karlsson, Kristján
Sveinsson and Mörður Árnarson. Reykjavík: Mál og menning, 1992.
Laws of Early Iceland – Grágás: The Codex Regius of Grágás with Material from other
Manuscripts. Translated by Andrew Dennis, Peter Foote and Richard Perkins.
Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1980.
Snorri Sturluson – Edda: Prologue and Gylfaginning. Edited by Anthony Faulkes.
London: Viking Society for Northern Research University College London, 2005.
Snorri Sturluson – Edda: Skáldskaparmál 1. Edited by Anthony Faulkes. London: Viking
Society for Northern Research University College London, 1998.
The Haustlǫng of Þjóðólfr of Hvinir. Edited by Richard North. Enfield Lock: Hisarlik
Press, 1997.
The Poetic Edda – Volume II: The Mythological Poems. Edited by Ursula Dronke.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.
Secondary Sources
Acker, Paul. “Introduction: Edda 2000.” In The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse
Mythology, edited by Paul Acker and Carolyne Larrington, xi-xviii. New York
and London: Routledge, 2002, 213-227.
───. “Dwarf-lore in Alvíssmál.” In The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology,
edited by Paul Acker and Carolyne Larrington, 213-227. New York and London:
Routledge, 2002, 213-227.
Ármann Jakobsson. “Enter the Dragon: Legendary Saga Courage and the Birth of the
Hero.” In Making History: Essays on the Fornaldarsögur, edited by Martin
Arnold and Alison Finlay, 33-52. London: Viking Society for Northern Research,
2010.
───. “The Hole: Problems in Medieval Dwarfology.” Arv: Nordic Yearbook of Folklore
61 (2005): 53-76.
───. “Where Do the Giants Live?” Arkiv För Nordisk Filologi 121 (2006): 101-112.
Assmann, Jan. Das kulturelle Gedächtnis – Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität
in frühen Hochkulturen. München: C. H. Beck, 2007.
47
Bandlien, Bjørn. Strategies of Passion: Love and Marriage in Medieval Iceland and
Norway. Translated by Betsy van der Hoek. Turnhout: Brepols, 2005.
Byock, Jesse. Viking Age Iceland. London: Penguin Books, 2001.
Clover, Carol J. “Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe.”
Representations 44 (Autumns 1993): 1-28.
Clunies Ross, Margaret. Prolonged Echoes: Old Norse Myths in Medieval Northern
Society – Volume 1: The Myths. Odense: Odense University Press, 1994.
───. “Reading Þrymskviða.” In The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology,
edited by Paul Acker and Carolyne Larrington, 177-194. New York and London:
Routledge, 2002.
Dronke, Ursula. “Art and Tradition in Skírnismál.” In English and Medieval Studies –
Presented to J. R.R. Tolkien on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, edited by
Norman Davis and Charles L. Wrenn, 250-268. London: George Allen & Unwin,
1962.
Eagleton, Terry. Marxism and Literary Criticism. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1976.
Fetterley, Judith. The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978.
Foote, Peter and David M. Wilson. The Viking Achievement – The Society and Culture of
Early Medieval Scandinavia. London: Sidgwick & Jackson 1970.
Frankki, James. “Cross-Dressing in the Poetic Edda - Mic muno Æsir argan kalla.”
Scandinavian Studies 84, 4 (2012): 425-437.
Friis-Jensen, Karsten, ed. Saxo Grammaticus – A Medieval Author Between Norse and
Latin Culture. København: Museum Tusculanum, 1981.
Gunnell, Terry. The Origins of Drama in Scandinavia. Cambridge/Rochester, New York:
Brewer/Boydel & Brewer, 1995.
Harris, Joseph. “Cursing With the Thistle: ‘Skírnismál’ 31, 6-8, and OE Metrical Charm
9, 16-17.” In The Poetic Edda – Essays on Old Norse Mythology, edited by Paul
Acker and Carolyne Larrington, 79-93. New York and London: Routeldge, 2002.
Hastrup, Kirsten. Culture and History in Medieval Iceland – An Anthropological Analysis
of Structure and Change. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.
───. “Presenting the Past – Reflections on Myth and History.” Folk 29 (1987): 257-270.
Jochens, Jenny. Women in Old Norse Society. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press,
1998.
───. Old Norse Images of Women. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,
1996.
───. “Consent in Marriage: Old Norse Law, Life, and Literature.” Scandinavian Studies
58, 2 (1986): 142-176.
48
Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir. Women in Old Norse Literature – Bodies, Words and
Power. New York: Palgrave and Macmillan, 2013.
Klingenberg, Hans. “Alvíssmál: Das Lied vom überweisen Zwerg.” Germanischromanische Monatsschrift 48 (1967): 113-42.
Klingenberg, Heinz. “Fǫr Skírnis: Brautwerbungsfahrt eines Werbungshelfers.”
Alvíssmál 6 (1996): 21-62.
Kress, Helga. “Taming the Shrew: The Rise of Patriarchy and the Subordination of the
Feminine in Old Norse Literature.” In Cold Counsel: Women in Old Norse
Literature and Mythology, edited by Sarah May Anderson and Karen Swenson,
81-92. New York: Garland, 2002.
Laqueur, Thomas Walter. Making Sex – Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.
Larrington, Carolyne. “‘What Does Woman Want?’ Mær and munr in Skírnismál.”
Alvíssmál 1 (1992): 3-16.
Liberman, Anatoly. “What Happened to Female Dwarfs?” In Mythological Women –
Studies in Memory of Lotte Motz (1922-1997), edited by Rudolf Simek and
Wilhelm Heizmann, 257-263. Wien: Fassbaender, 2002.
McKinnell, John. “Myth as Therapy: The Function of Þrymskviða.” In Essays on Eddic
Poetry, edited by Donata Kick and John D. Shafer, 200-220. Toronto: University
of Toronto Press, 2014.
Meulengracht Sørensen, Preben. Kapitler af Nordens litteratur i oldtid og middelalder.
Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag, 2006.
───. The Unmanly Man – Concepts of Sexual Defamation in Early Northern Society.
Odense: Odense University Press, 1983.
Moberg, Lennart. “The Languages of Alvíssmál.” Saga-Book of the Viking Society 18
(1970-73): 299-323.
Motz, Lotte. The Wise One of the Mountain – Form, Function, and Significance of the
Subterranean Smith: a Study in Folklore. Göppingen: Kümmerle, 1983.
Olsen, Magnus Bernhard. “Fra gammelnorsk myte og kultus.” Maal og Minne 1 (1909):
17-36.
Raudvere, Catharina. “The Power of the Spoken Word as Literary Motif and Ritual
Practice in Old Norse Literature.” Viking and Medieval Scandinavia 1, 1 (2005):
179-202.
Schjødt, Jens Peter. Initiation Between Two Worlds: Structure and Symbolism in PreChristian Scandinavian Religion. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark,
2008.
Simek, Rudolf and Hermann Pálsson. Lexikon der Altnordischen Literatur. Stuttgart:
Kröner, 1987.
49
Stavnem, Rolf. “The Kennings in Ragnarsdrápa.” Medieval Scandinavia 14 (2004): 161184.
Vestergaard, Torben Anders. “Marriage Exchange and Social Structure in Old Norse
Mythology.” In Social Approaches to Viking Studies, edited by Ross Samson, 2134. Glasgow: Cruithne Press, 1991.
von See, Klaus et al. Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 2: Götterlieder Skírnismál, Hárbarðslióð, Hymiskviða, Lokasenna, Þrymskviða. Heidelberg:
Universitätsverlag Winter, 1997.
───. Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda, Band 3: Götterlieder – Volundarkviða,
Alvíssmál, Baldrs draumar, Rígsþula, Hyndlolióð, Grottasongr. Heidelberg:
Universitätsverlag Winter, 2000.
50
List of Abbreviations
Alv
Alvíssmál
Gg
Grágás
Gylf
Gylfaginning
Hdl
Hyndluljóð
Ls
Lokasenna
Skm
Skírnismál
Skskm Skáldskaparmál
Þrk
Þrymskviða
51